Might another round of devaluation post-Brexit help, simply by making UK exports more attractive and reducing our ability to purchase imported goods?
Of course, in the long run the economy's not going to get fixed whilst such a large percentage of the national wealth is locked up in housing. There's no incentive for most of us, other than the very well-off, to invest in business through shares when property offers such fat guaranteed returns (and when, for many people, being forced to take out a colossal mortgage means there's not much left for anything but day-to-day expenses for the rest of their working lives.)
(Edit: Actually, I think the rotten property market may even be the main reason why so many people still live beyond their means. When mortgages or rents are so large that you can't save very much, then the only way you may be able to afford luxuries - short of a lottery win or a bequest - is to buy them all on credit.)
How low can it go?
Who can say? The financial markets are a mysterious beast to the uninitiated (and often, it seems, to most of the initiated as well.) The only constant is that, whenever currencies or shares move up or down, somebody who's clever, lucky or both is making a quick fortune.
For all I know the pound might not move very much at all. It seems to have stabilised despite the increasingly funereal mood music emanating from the Brexit negotiations.
I made a nice profit on betting the £ as it rose towards the last Brexit vote in the Commons. Fortunately I took a big chunk of profit before the debate, since the £ has sunk back since. But I still believe the opportunity is on the upside, since any sort of outcome resolves the uncertainty and anything other than no deal exit (which I don't believe any PM would ever risk) should produce a significant upward bounce in £/$ and £/€.
I am not putting my hard earned on it but I do agree with this. I think everything short of a nuclear winter is priced into Sterling at the moment and there is a lot of upside out of a mere disaster.
If I was a billionaire I'd be looking at London property. It is now in an unprecedented period of stagnation, or decline (in some parts) all of which is based on Brexit uncertainty. Almost ANY outcome (maybe even no deal) will remove the uncertainty, and make it desirable again (especially if the pounds falls further).
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only if you were a billionaire with aspirations to become a millionaire. And in such a case you would have more fun buying a big yacht or a private jet.
The problem , I don't think it'll be that bad. But I think people are so fixated on Brexit, they forget that Britain doesn't currently pay its way. And that - one way or another - will revert.
British High Streets will look even more desolate if we ever do start living within our means.
I'm curious as to what French and German high streets look like given that retail sales are falling there.
Germany is somewhat resistant to internet shopping, so the German high street is doing OK (even if this is unsustainable and possibly inefficient in the long term)
Provincial France, by contrast, is suffering badly (this may be more to do with labour laws than e-commerce). The rundown French towns I visited on my recent trip to Cognac/Bordeaux were as bleak and boarded up as anywhere in Wales or Lancashire.
And doubtless a factor in the French protests.
But if France is suffering in the pretty tourist area then the likes of Picardy and Lorraine must be in a bad way.
Csmip
Indeed I recommend a tour of Bordeaux to strip away any remaining delusions about the unique fanciness of French wine. They churn it out in tidal waves, from huge concrete warehouses, with ruthlessly clever use of branding to make it seem unusually posh and desirable.
Thanks - I'll blame Rick Stein for the misapprehension - I watched his trip to Bordeaux program earlier this week.
I do wonder if there are French / Spanish / Italian TV chefs eulogizing the 'authentic street food' of Britain.
Isn't the Dordogne near to Bordeaux ? Is that similarly over-rated ?
France is big. The Dordogne and Bordeaux may both be in "south west France" but they about as close to each other as Bath is to Birmingham.
The Dordogne is genuinely beautiful, full of forests and hills and exquisite villages (tho it suffers from depopulation). It also has nice if somewhat fatty food.
Bordeaux the region is, by contrast, dull and often ugly, tho the centre of the city (where Stein went) is very lovely. With good oysters. The food is otherwise a bit meh, like much of French cuisine these days.
Why the Irish don't abandon their failed republic and restore the queen of Ireland to her throne is beyond me, it'd solve so many problems
The mystery to me is why we think there is any benefit whatsoever from holding onto the six counties.
Polling shows time and again that most mainland Brits, certainly most English people, don't give a fuck about Ulster (in the nicest possible way) and would be quite content for Ireland to reunify.
I should add that I am not one of them: I am a Brit and a Celt and I think the whole nation benefits from being four nations.
But I have to accept most of my fellow Englishmen and women do not share my attachment.
The Irish attitude to reunification is equally intriguing: they desire it in a spiritual, St Augustine-and-celibacy kind of way, but when asked how they feel about it happening NOW then they quail. At least that's the mood I pick up from their media, which I have been following recently
I've also noted that the Irish still suffer a martyr complex, despite benefiting intensely from the EU, and the UK's generosity therein. e.g. Varadkar recently claimed that Ireland was being "victimised" by Brexit.
You what? The UK wishes to be independent, and somehow that makes Ireland a "victim"? Fuck off.
The northern Irish to me seem to have the attitude of expats who by some quirk of history are still living here.
I expect Americans would be similar if their ancestors had neglected to exterminate the natives.
American history about the revolution is still absurdly mythological and hyberbolic.
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I would have thought someone would have tried a revisionist line over there by now. But, no. None.
Well, i am off to bed shortly. But if anyone wants to know why I am so frustrated and fed up at matters in education, here is a model answer to a question about the Battle of Hastings from AQA. This is quoted from the actual mark scheme that was used last year to mark real GCSEs.
'The interpretation is convincing because it acknowledges Harold’s possibly daring brilliance as a commander. To have beaten off the first invasion at Stamford Bridge and then taken up a good defensive position on Senlac Hill blocking the road to London. He had roughly the same number of troops as William and deployed them with a shield wall. His troops lasted nearly the whole day to hold their position and beat off the Normans.'
That's for the PERFECT answer. The model that got 8 out of 8.
And do you know what's frightening?
That's still not the most epic fuck up from the new exams. Amanda Spielmann buggering up the marking criteria because she's so dumb she can't count to nine still takes first.
Good night.
FFS that’s depressing. It’s like saying we won the American war of independence apart from all the defeats and our eventual surrender.
Not really. I am afraid ydoethur is showing he is a teacher first and a historian second. Most historians of the period recognise that Harold was indeed a great commander. Faced with an almost impossible situation of fighting off two invasions in succession - one against an army which had already beaten part of his army before he arrived - he did far better than many might have expected. That he lost was not down to his being a poor commander but down to circumstances largely beyond his control. It would be fair to say he was a poor diplomat perhaps but certainly not a poor commander.
Oh come on. He was facing an army that had literally burnt its boats, that was in a hostile country, that basically had one shot to win. They may have got lucky with the shot in the eye but the fact is that a more cautious approach was guaranteed to win and Harold blew it. He needed to be a Varrus and William would have been in deep doodoo.
Do you mean Fabius who wore down Hannibal ?
Or Varro who lost at Cannae ?
Varrus was the Roman who lost Germany for Augustus.
Sorry it’s Varocusus, who I think you have called Fabius. Was he not the one who gave us the word prevaricate?
Might another round of devaluation post-Brexit help, simply by making UK exports more attractive and reducing our ability to purchase imported goods?
Of course, in the long run the economy's not going to get fixed whilst such a large percentage of the national wealth is locked up in housing. There's no incentive for most of us, other than the very well-off, to invest in business through shares when property offers such fat guaranteed returns (and when, for many people, being forced to take out a colossal mortgage means there's not much left for anything but day-to-day expenses for the rest of their working lives.)
(Edit: Actually, I think the rotten property market may even be the main reason why so many people still live beyond their means. When mortgages or rents are so large that you can't save very much, then the only way you may be able to afford luxuries - short of a lottery win or a bequest - is to buy them all on credit.)
How low can it go?
Who can say? The financial markets are a mysterious beast to the uninitiated (and often, it seems, to most of the initiated as well.) The only constant is that, whenever currencies or shares move up or down, somebody who's clever, lucky or both is making a quick fortune.
For all I know the pound might not move very much at all. It seems to have stabilised despite the increasingly funereal mood music emanating from the Brexit negotiations.
I made a nice profit on betting the £ as it rose towards the last Brexit vote in the Commons. Fortunately I took a big chunk of profit before the debate, since the £ has sunk back since. But I still believe the opportunity is on the upside, since any sort of outcome resolves the uncertainty and anything other than no deal exit (which I don't believe any PM would ever risk) should produce a significant upward bounce in £/$ and £/€.
I am not putting my hard earned on it but I do agree with this. I think everything short of a nuclear winter is priced into Sterling at the moment and there is a lot of upside out of a mere disaster.
If I was a billionaire I'd be looking at London property. It is now in an unprecedented period of stagnation, or decline (in some parts) all of which is based on Brexit uncertainty. Almost ANY outcome (maybe even no deal) will remove the uncertainty, and make it desirable again (especially if the pounds falls further).
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Surely it’s just a matter of time and another book or two.
Well, i am off to bed shortly. But if anyone wants to know why I am so frustrated and fed up at matters in education, here is a model answer to a question about the Battle of Hastings from AQA. This is quoted from the actual mark scheme that was used last year to mark real GCSEs.
'The interpretation is convincing because it acknowledges Harold’s possibly daring brilliance as a commander. To have beaten off the first invasion at Stamford Bridge and then taken up a good defensive position on Senlac Hill blocking the road to London. He had roughly the same number of troops as William and deployed them with a shield wall. His troops lasted nearly the whole day to hold their position and beat off the Normans.'
That's for the PERFECT answer. The model that got 8 out of 8.
And do you know what's frightening?
That's still not the most epic fuck up from the new exams. Amanda Spielmann buggering up the marking criteria because she's so dumb she can't count to nine still takes first.
Good night.
FFS that’s depressing. It’s like saying we won the American war of independence apart from all the defeats and our eventual surrender.
Georgia, and New York island (long Island) were effectively under Crown control right until the end. At times we held Rhode Island and South Carolina too.
So, not a total slam dunk.
Well it wasn’t quite one in the eye like poor Harold but the fact is we lost. As did he.
Given that net trade in goods with the EU is around 8% of GDP, if I were to take a guess I’d say something like 0.5% off in Q2 (-25% by value of trade in goods with the EU), maybe down to a total of 1% by the end of the year before recovering early in 2020. There will be a technical recession, but the whole of Europe is about to get one.
Supply chains will adjust much faster than predicted, and government will be united in measures to reduce unnecessary friction. Companies already have a lot of plans in place, what’s causing the immediate problems is the uncertainty of which plan to implement.
The problem with that - and all other forecasts - is that they continue to rely on the UK consumer spending more than 100% of his or her income.
So, the ability of the government to raise demand through the usual methods isn't there.
The problem the UK economy continues to have is that it is fundamentally unbalanced. This isn't anything to do with Brexit, it's the consequence of Blair, Brown, Darling, and Osborne, who discovered that you could do Keynesianism by the back door by persuading people to spend more than they earned.
The real risk of No Deal Brexit is that it finally kicks off the inevitable rebalancing. In the 1990-93 recession, the household savings rate reached 15%. That's 11% above where we are now. To put in context, if we were to see a similar level of swing, it would be the same as Spain had during the Eurozone crisis. Now, I don't think it'll be that bad. But I think people are so fixated on Brexit, they forget that Britain doesn't currently pay its way. And that - one way or another - will revert.
British High Streets will look even more desolate if we ever do start living within our means.
I'm curious as to what French and German high streets look like given that retail sales are falling there.
Surely it's a good thing if we start living within our means.
Sadly the way politics works, more people would vote for their children living within their means.
I don't think that's true. I think most people take the future interests of their children and grandchildren very seriously.
Of course, they may value different things and not see the world in quite the same way, but that's not the same thing.
American history about the revolution is still absurdly mythological and hyberbolic.
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I visited the museum of the revolution in Philadelphia recently. Worth a visit.
I had not realised the "taxation without representation" they were so miffed about was Stamp Duty. My American friends couldn't comprehend that we still pay it.
Germany is somewhat resistant to internet shopping, so the German high street is doing OK (even if this is unsustainable and possibly inefficient in the long term)
Provincial France, by contrast, is suffering badly (this may be more to do with labour laws than e-commerce). The rundown French towns I visited on my recent trip to Cognac/Bordeaux were as bleak and boarded up as anywhere in Wales or Lancashire.
And doubtless a factor in the French protests.
But if France is suffering in the pretty tourist area then the likes of Picardy and Lorraine must be in a bad way.
Cognac and Bordeaux are very definitely NOT pretty tourist areas (though Bordeaux is a handsome city). They are flat, boring, grey and tedious, and, once you get there, you realise that the production of cognac and Bordeaux wine is an industry like any other. That is to say: when you look out at the endless vineyards along the Garonne you are looking out at an essentially utilitarian and industrial landscape, like the Welsh coalfields or modern Guangdong, only with the odd charming chateau amongst the grittiness.
Indeed I recommend a tour of Bordeaux to strip away any remaining delusions about the unique fanciness of French wine. They churn it out in tidal waves, from huge concrete warehouses, with ruthlessly clever use of branding to make it seem unusually posh and desirable.
Thanks - I'll blame Rick Stein for the misapprehension - I watched his trip to Bordeaux program earlier this week.
I do wonder if there are French / Spanish / Italian TV chefs eulogizing the 'authentic street food' of Britain.
Isn't the Dordogne near to Bordeaux ? Is that similarly over-rated ?
France is big. The Dordogne and Bordeaux may both be in "south west France" but they about as close to each other as Bath is to Birmingham.
The Dordogne is genuinely beautiful, full of forests and hills and exquisite villages (tho it suffers from depopulation). It also has nice if somewhat fatty food.
Bordeaux the region is, by contrast, dull and often ugly, tho the centre of the city (where Stein went) is very lovely. With good oysters. The food is otherwise a bit meh, like much of French cuisine these days.
Yet Dordogne is an overwhelmingly left-wing stronghold:
American history about the revolution is still absurdly mythological and hyberbolic.
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I visited the museum of the revolution in Philadelphia recently. Worth a visit.
I had not realised the "taxation without representation" they were so miffed about was Stamp Duty. My American friends couldn't comprehend that we still pay it.
I always thought that it was some tax on imported goods, specifically tea, hence the Boston tea party.
I'm more familiar with Italy than France or Germany, but my impression is that the overheads in running a shop are less there (not least because many are family owned rather than rented), the culture of personal contact through shopping persists, and the concept of shopping online especially for things like groceries is still in its infancy. Which isn't to say that where we lead, they wont follow, but it will be the younger generation that leads the change, unlike the UK where many middle aged folk already do most of their shopping online.
I think our problem is a combination of the high cost of rented retail space; landlords holding onto empty retail properties waiting for new tenants who are probably never going to come; lack of funds, imagination or both on the part of local authorities in redeveloping clapped out retail areas; and, of course, the low cost and convenience of online shopping (and banking.) I also seem to recall reading somewhere that we're close to the tipping point, in urban centres at least, where ordering good quality takeaway food will be cheaper (as well as easier for time-constrained or plain lazy households) than cooking your own meals f Clearly physical retail isn't going to decline to zero, especially in large centres and better-off and/or touristy areas, but the contraction probably has some distance left to go yet.
Town centres are destined either to become entirely residential, as have most of our villages which in bygone years contained post offices, butchers, greengrocers and the like, or reinvent themselves as meeting places with a primary focus on cafes, restaurants and other spaces for social meeting and service provision, with some ancillary retail on the side. Most councils currently are struggling with working out which of their towns are heading for either destination.
It will be the latter.
I think the more honest answer is that many, but not all, town centres have the potential to reinvent themselves in such a way, but that there will be a fair few that end up as entirely residential with no need for any commercial high street activity at all, given that there is somewhere more successful within easy driving distance. It is already the case that in many town centres the most valuable use for even high street properties is as conversion to residential, and it is only local planning regulations that hold back the tide.
I don't think you can take the social entirely out of human nature.
Therefore, i'd always expect a market in any reasonably sized town for a place where people can meet, drink and eat.
What are Mrs May's key characteristics? - Stubborn - Anti-free movement - Favours blackmail as a strategy - Kick the can but can pivot (GE 2017) - Very committed and clued up on her deal.
My conclusion is that she will continue to try to get her deal (including backstop) over the line by "No Deal" blackmail, and when that fails, will go for an extension for a GE on her deal. She won't give up on it.
Because she survived her VONC, she is fireproof within her own party until the end of the year.
Her cabinet supports her deal so will probably support a GE on her deal (rather than a second referendum on her deal). It will get through parliament because Labour will support it.
The Tories will have a clear manifesto based on her deal. Vote for this and get Brexit or stay at home and get Corbyn (the blackmail bit). Labour, on the other hand, will have a real problem with their manifesto and will probably end up with a CU Brexit losing a lot of Remainer Labourites to the LibDems and splitting the centre left vote. Tories get an overall majority and pass her deal with two fingers to the DUP. Sorted.
"Tories get an overall majority and pass her deal ..." That's the problematic bit though, isn't it? Getting the ERG to vote for anything but Eurogeddon.
A big overall majority. So two fingers to the ERG as well. Also some of them will have stood as independents and lost their seats.
A big overall majority? Depends very much where Labour positions itself.
Yes. I'm assuming that Labour will take the Corbyn line on Brexit (we're leaving with CU) and lose support to the LDs. He will also try to make it a campaign on NHS, education, jobs etc which he did successfully last time but would fail this time as Brexit is top issue.
Tories on 42% Labour on 34% and LDs on 15% gives Tories an overall majority of 28.
The other question is whether she could get enough votes in the House to call an election. My understanding is that most of her own MPs would oppose a GE, so she may come up short.
She needs 417 votes. She needs about half of her MPs to vote for it. I'm sure she'd get that, particularly if they thought they could win and achieve Brexit.
She actually needs 434 votes.
You're right. Of course. Faulty maths in the excitement of making my point.
Might another round of devaluation post-Brexit help, simply by making UK exports more attractive and reducing our ability to purchase imported goods?
Of couryou may be able to afford luxuries - short of a lottery win or a bequest - is to buy them all on credit.)
How low can it go?
For all I know the pound might not move very much at all. It seems to have stabilised despite the increasingly funereal mood music emanating from the Brexit negotiations.
I made a nict upward bounce in £/$ and £/€.
I am not putting my hard earned on it but I do agree with this. I think everything short of a nuclear winter is priced into Sterling at the moment and there is a lot of upside out of a mere disaster.
If I was a billionaire I'd be looking at London property. It is now in an unprecedented period of stagnation, or decline (in some parts) all of which is based on Brexit uncertainty. Almost ANY outcome (maybe even no deal) will remove the uncertainty, and make it desirable again (especially if the pounds falls further).
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only if you were a billionaire with aspirations to become a millionaire. And in such a case you would have more fun buying a big yacht or a private jet.
The FT did a piece recently on the London property slump, comparing it to other property slumps in major world cities. They added up the facts and decided that the decline was already almost unprecedented (for London and most other world cities) since the 1960s. They then pessimistically concluded that London was facing a unique, Tokyo type slump, when property crashed by 50% or more - and has never recovered.
To my mind that is ludicrous. The demographic pressures alone are entirely different. That is why I think London property will soon be underpriced (compared to competitor cities like NYC, Hong Kong, Singapore, Paris).
But who knows, maybe the Brexit-loathing FT is right, and London is about to be Tokyo in the 1990s. As I say, if I had a billion I;d bet against them, but as I barely have a million and I am already heavily invested (in my own small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
My brother is conservative in his strategy
But 12m ago he reduced his risk exposure to London property from 66% to 50% - effectively pricing in a 25% fall in prices.
Might another round of devaluation post-Brexit help, simply by making UK exports more attractive and reducing our ability to purchase imported goods?
Of couryou may be able to afford luxuries - short of a lottery win or a bequest - is to buy them all on credit.)
How low can it go?
Who can it negotiations.
I made a nict upward bounce in £/$ and £/€.
I am not putting o Sterling at the moment and there is a lot of upside out of a mere disaster.
If I was a
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only if you were a billionaire with aspirations to become a millionaire. And in such a case you would have more fun buying a big yacht or a private jet.
The FT did a piece recently on the London property slump, comparing it to other property slumps in major world cities. They added up the facts and decided that the decline was already almost unprecedented (for London and most other world cities) since the 1960s. They then pessimistically concluded that London was facing a unique, Tokyo type slump, when property crashed by 50% or more - and has never recovered.
To my mind that is ludicrous. The demographic pressures alone are entirely different. That is why I think London property will soon be underpriced (compared to competitor cities like NYC, Hong Kong, Singapore, Paris).
But who knows, maybe the Brexit-loathing FT is right, and London is about to be Tokyo in the 1990s. As I say, if I had a billion I;d bet against them, but as I barely have a million and I am already heavily invested (in my own small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The biggest mistake investors make is failing to realise that everything is cyclical. When I was young, people who succeeded in life moved out of London, and many of its central districts were seen as very unattractive places to live. Over the past twenty years or so London has enjoyed a tremendous boom, driven significantly by overseas investors seeing its property as an attractive risk free investment. But London has already passed its peak, is becoming less attractive to live as family communties are replaced by dormitories for the youth of the world, and Brexit will accelerate the trend for foreign disinvestment. Yes, Tokyo in 1990 is a very apt comparison. Back then, there were plenty of people who thought you couldn't lose buying property there.
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Well, i am off to bed shortly. But if anyone wants to know why I am so frustrated and fed up at matters in education, here is a model answer to a question about the Battle of Hastings from AQA. This is quoted from the actual mark scheme that was used last year to mark real GCSEs.
'The interpretation is convincing because it acknowledges Harold’s possibly daring brilliance as a commander. To have beaten off the first invasion at Stamford Bridge and then taken up a good defensive position on Senlac Hill blocking the road to London. He had roughly the same number of troops as William and deployed them with a shield wall. His troops lasted nearly the whole day to hold their position and beat off the Normans.'
That's for the PERFECT answer. The model that got 8 out of 8.
And do you know what's frightening?
That's still not the most epic fuck up from the new exams. Amanda Spielmann buggering up the marking criteria because she's so dumb she can't count to nine still takes first.
Good night.
FFS that’s depressing. It’s like saying we won the American war of independence apart from all the defeats and our eventual surrender.
Not really. I am afraid ydoethur is showing he is a teacher first and a historian second. Most historians of the period recognise that Harold was indeed a great commander. Faced with an almost impossible situation of fighting off two invasions in succession - one against an army which had already beaten part of his army before he arrived - he did far better than many might have expected. That he lost was not down to his being a poor commander but down to circumstances largely beyond his control. It would be fair to say he was a poor diplomat perhaps but certainly not a poor commander.
Oh come on. He was facing an army that had literally burnt its boats, that was in a hostile country, that basically had one shot to win. They may have got lucky with the shot in the eye but the fact is that a more cautious approach was guaranteed to win and Harold blew it. He needed to be a Varrus and William would have been in deep doodoo.
Do you mean Fabius who wore down Hannibal ?
Or Varro who lost at Cannae ?
Varrus was the Roman who lost Germany for Augustus.
Sorry it’s Varocusus, who I think you have called Fabius. Was he not the one who gave us the word prevaricate?
I've not heard that before, it would be interesting if that was the origin of prevaricate but he certainly gave us 'Fabian Strategy'.
Germany is somewhat resistant to internet shopping, so the German high street is doing OK (even if this is unsustainable and possibly inefficient in the long term)
Provincial France, by contrast, is suffering badly (this may be more to do with labour laws than e-commerce). The rundown French towns I visited on my recent trip to Cognac/Bordeaux were as bleak and boarded up as anywhere in Wales or Lancashire.
And doubtless a factor in the French protests.
But if France is suffering in the pretty tourist area then the likes of Picardy and Lorraine must be in a bad way.
Cognac
Indeed I recommend a tour of Bordeaux to strip away any remaining delusions about the unique fanciness of French wine. They churn it out in tidal waves, from huge concrete warehouses, with ruthlessly clever use of branding to make it seem unusually posh and desirable.
Thanks - I'll blame Rick Stein for the misapprehension - I watched his trip to Bordeaux program earlier this week.
I do wonder if there are French / Spanish / Italian TV chefs eulogizing the 'authentic street food' of Britain.
Isn't the Dordogne near to Bordeaux ? Is that similarly over-rated ?
France is big. The Dordogne and Bordeaux may both be in "south west France" but they about as close to each other as Bath is to Birmingham.
The Dordogne is genuinely beautiful, full of forests and hills and exquisite villages (tho it suffers from depopulation). It also has nice if somewhat fatty food.
Bordeaux the region is, by contrast, dull and often ugly, tho the centre of the city (where Stein went) is very lovely. With good oysters. The food is otherwise a bit meh, like much of French cuisine these days.
Yet Dordogne is an overwhelmingly left-wing stronghold:
Difficult to imagine the Cotswolds or Herefordshire with that voting pattern.
French politics has a rather strange east-west gradient (whereas most countries are politically divided north-south). The east of France is more rightwing, and the west (in general) is more leftwing. Various theories surround this phenomenon - religion, Atlanticism, the Revolution, etc
There’s a definite east west divide in England, too. If you look st the old UKIP vote it was strongest in East Anglia, the East Midlands and Yorkshire. The strongest Leave vote was in the same places. Maybe it’s a Danelaw thing. The
Corbyn has held out a lot longer than I thought he would on many things relating to Brexit, particularly when Starmer has been obviously seeking to take them further in certain directions.
And apropos of nothing, but since I read this (very long) profile very early in the morning during a bout of insomnia, I cannot get over how utterly crazy are the claims around this author Dan Mallory.
I had no idea property prices were slumping in London. The newly combined, 400 person business I’m now part of is looking for offices in the centre of town and the pricing is astronomical. Should we be holding off?
Well, i am off to bed shortly. But if anyone wants to know why I am so frustrated and fed up at matters in education, here is a model answer to a question about the Battle of Hastings from AQA. This is quoted from the actual mark scheme that was used last year to mark real GCSEs.
'The interpretation is convincing because it acknowledges Harold’s possibly daring brilliance as a commander. To have beaten off the first invasion at Stamford Bridge and then taken up a good defensive position on Senlac Hill blocking the road to London. He had roughly the same number of troops as William and deployed them with a shield wall. His troops lasted nearly the whole day to hold their position and beat off the Normans.'
.
FFS that’s depressing. It’s like saying we won the American war of independence apart from all the defeats and our eventual surrender.
Not really. I am afraid ydoethur is showing he is a teacher first and a historian second. Most historians of the period recognise that Harold was indeed a great commander. Faced with an almost impossible situation of fighting off two invasions in succession - one against an army which had already beaten part of his army before he arrived - he did far better than many might have expected. That he lost was not down to his being a poor commander but down to circumstances largely beyond his control. It would be fair to say he was a poor diplomat perhaps but certainly not a poor commander.
Oh come on. He was facing an army that had literally burnt its boats, that was in a hostile country, that basically had one shot to win. They may have got lucky with the shot in the eye but the fact is that a more cautious approach was guaranteed to win and Harold blew it. He needed to be a Varrus and William would have been in deep doodoo.
Do you mean Fabius who wore down Hannibal ?
Or Varro who lost at Cannae ?
Varrus was the Roman who lost Germany for Augustus.
Sorry it’s Varocusus, who I think you have called Fabius. Was he not the one who gave us the word prevaricate?
I've not heard that before, it would be interesting if that was the origin of prevaricate but he certainly gave us 'Fabian Strategy'.
PB proving even more educational than usual tonight. Certainly a Fabian strategy would surely have defeated William in fairly short order. Harold may have been a good tactician but he was a poor strategist.
Might another round of devaluation post-Brexit help, simply by making UK exports more attractive and reducing our ability to purchase imported goods?
Of couryou may be able to afford luxuries - short of a lottery win or a bequest - is to buy them all on credit.)
How low can it go?
For all I know the pound might not move very much at all. It seems to have stabilised despite the increasingly funereal mood music emanating from the Brexit negotiations.
I made a nict upward bounce in £/$ and £/€.
I am not putting my hard earned on it but I do agree with this. I think everything short of a nuclear winter is priced into Sterling at the moment and there is a lot of upside out of a mere disaster.
If I was a billionaire I'd be looking at London property. It is now in an unprecedented period of stagnation, or decline (in some parts) all of which is based on Brexit uncertainty. Almost ANY outcome (maybe even no deal) will remove the uncertainty, and make it desirable again (especially if the pounds falls further).
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only if you were a billionaire with aspirations to become a millionaire. And in such a case you would have more fun buying a big yacht or a private jet.
The F
But who knows, maybe the Brexit-loathing FT is right, and London is about to be Tokyo in the 1990s. As I say, if I had a billion I;d bet against them, but as I barely have a million and I am already heavily invested (in my own small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
My brother is conservative in his strategy
But 12m ago he reduced his risk exposure to London property from 66% to 50% - effectively pricing in a 25% fall in prices.
Parts of prime central London have already fallen 25%. Question is whether they will go significantly further. If there is a Deal or Remain/Revoke I think def not. No Deal, not sure.
Aye - but even where prices have fallen 25% he can now tolerate a further 33% before being at risk of actually losing money 😊
Might another round of devaluation post-Brexit help, simply by making UK exports more attractive and reducing our ability to purchase imported goods?
Of couryou may be able to afford luxuries - short of a lottery win or a bequest - is to buy them all on credit.)
How low can it go?
For all I know the pound might not move very much at all. It seems to have stabilised despite the increasingly funereal mood music emanating from the Brexit negotiations.
I made a nict upward bounce in £/$ and £/€.
I am not putting my hard earned on it but I do agree with this. I think everything short of a nuclear winter is priced into Sterling at the moment and there is a lot of upside out of a mere disaster.
If I was a billionaire I'd be looking at London property. It is now in an unprecedented period of stagnation, or decline (in some parts) all of which is based on Brexit uncertainty. Almost ANY outcome (maybe even no deal) will remove the uncertainty, and make it desirable again (especially if the pounds falls further).
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only if you were a billionaire with aspirations to become a millionaire. And in such a case you would have more fun buying a big yacht or a private jet.
The F
But who knows, maybe the Brexit-loathing FT is right, and London is about to be Tokyo in the 1990s. As I say, if I had a billion I;d bet against them, but as I barely have a million and I am already heavily invested (in my own small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
My brother is conservative in his strategy
But 12m ago he reduced his risk exposure to London property from 66% to 50% - effectively pricing in a 25% fall in prices.
Parts of prime central London have already fallen 25%. Question is whether they will go significantly further. If there is a Deal or Remain/Revoke I think def not. No Deal, not sure.
I had no idea property prices were slumping in London. The newly combined, 400 person business I’m now part of is looking for offices in the centre of town and the pricing is astronomical. Should we be holding off?
Why the Irish don't abandon their failed republic and restore the queen of Ireland to her throne is beyond me, it'd solve so many problems
The mystery to me is why we think there is any benefit whatsoever from holding onto the six counties.
Polling shows time and again that most mainland Brits, certainly most English people, don't give a fuck about Ulster (in the nicest possible way) and would be quite content for Ireland to reunify.
I should add that I am not one of them: I am a Brit and a Celt and I think the whole nation benefits from being four nations.
But I have to accept most of my fellow Englishmen and women do not share my attachment.
The Irish attitude to reunification is equally intriguing: they desire it in a spiritual, St Augustine-and-celibacy kind of way, but when asked how they feel about it happening NOW then they quail. At least that's the mood I pick up from their media, which I have been following recently
I've also noted that the Irish still suffer a martyr complex, despite benefiting intensely from the EU, and the UK's generosity therein. e.g. Varadkar recently claimed that Ireland was being "victimised" by Brexit.
You what? The UK wishes to be independent, and somehow that makes Ireland a "victim"? Fuck off.
The northern Irish to me seem to have the attitude of expats who by some quirk of history are still living here.
I expect Americans would be similar if their ancestors had neglected to exterminate the natives.
American history about the revolution is still absurdly mythological and hyberbolic.
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I would have thought someone would have tried a revisionist line over there by now. But, no. None.
They also conveniently skip over the American Loyalists. The American Revolution was substantially a Civil War, and there was considerable sympathy on these islands for the revolutionaries too.
The troops of Banastre Tarleton were substantially American Loyalists, not British as depicted in "The Patriot" by Mel Gibson:
I had no idea property prices were slumping in London. The newly combined, 400 person business I’m now part of is looking for offices in the centre of town and the pricing is astronomical. Should we be holding off?
At a guess, the fact that mass Brexit-related redundancies are not being announced all over the City would suggest that demand for business customers may still be holding up (i.e. if there is a slump it's residential.) One certainly reads enough stories in the papers of prime central London apartments lying empty and, thinking of thirtysomethings, surely unless one were either very rich or very desperate to stay in the capital, one would move out to the commuter belt when going from renting to buying?
There'd be nothing inconsistent in office space remaining at a premium whilst residential property underwent a significant correction.
I had no idea property prices were slumping in London. The newly combined, 400 person business I’m now part of is looking for offices in the centre of town and the pricing is astronomical. Should we be holding off?
But 12m ago he reduced his risk exposure to London property from 66% to 50% - effectively pricing in a 25% fall in prices.
Scanning the thread I read that as "12m years ago" and found it completely unsurprising that his financial planning would take account of such timescales.
FFS that’s depressing. It’s like saying we won the American war of independence apart from all the defeats and our eventual surrender.
Not really. I am afraid ydoethur is showing he is a teacher first and a historian second. Most historians of the period recognise that Harold was indeed a great commander. Faced with an almost impossible situation of fighting off two invasions in succession - one against an army which had already beaten part of his army before he arrived - he did far better than many might have expected. That he lost was not down to his being a poor commander but down to circumstances largely beyond his control. It would be fair to say he was a poor diplomat perhaps but certainly not a poor commander.
Oh come on. He was facing an army that had literally burnt its boats, that was in a hostile country, that basically had one shot to win. They may have got lucky with the shot in the eye but the fact is that a more cautious approach was guaranteed to win and Harold blew it. He needed to be a Varrus and William would have been in deep doodoo.
Do you mean Fabius who wore down Hannibal ?
Or Varro who lost at Cannae ?
Varrus was the Roman who lost Germany for Augustus.
Sorry it’s Varocusus, who I think you have called Fabius. Was he not the one who gave us the word prevaricate?
I've not heard that before, it would be interesting if that was the origin of prevaricate but he certainly gave us 'Fabian Strategy'.
PB proving even more educational than usual tonight. Certainly a Fabian strategy would surely have defeated William in fairly short order. Harold may have been a good tactician but he was a poor strategist.
Harold was a politician who thought he needed a quick victory.
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The biggest mistake investors make is failing to realise that everything is cyclical. When I was young, people who succeeded in life moved out of London, and many of its central districts were seen as very unattractive places to live. Over the past twenty years or so London has enjoyed a tremendous boom, driven significantly by overseas investors seeing its property as an attractive risk free investment. But London has already passed its peak, is becoming less attractive to live as family communties are replaced by dormitories for the youth of the world, and Brexit will accelerate the trend for foreign disinvestment. Yes, Tokyo in 1990 is a very apt comparison. Back then, there were plenty of people who thought you couldn't lose buying property there.
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
Lots of London specific factors I think. I wouldn't read too much into the brexit angle, although surely people are putting off big decisions until there is a bit more clarity.
I do wonder whether "prime" London has just moved and it is taking decades for people to fully notice. It hasn't made sense for anyone normal and under 40 to move to (insert traditionally posh bit of London here) for a long long time.
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
Might another round of devaluation post-Brexit help, simply by making UK exports more attractive and reducing our ability to purchase imported goods?
Of couryou may be able to afford luxuries - short of a lottery win or a bequest - is to buy them all on credit.)
How low can it go?
Who can it negotiations.
I made a nict upward bounce in £/$ and £/€.
I disaster.
If I was a
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
snip
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
I see that the Vietnamese don't want to go to Paris and improve their French.
The ERG continue to move the goal posts . They really are a disgusting bunch who want a no deal and could care less how that effects the country .
Any chance they can be paraded as traitors by the media or is that only reserved for the saner members of the Tory party !
There must be a psychological term for fearing what you want the most so much that you deliberately stop yourself getting it, for fear that the rest of your life would have no meaning.
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The biggest mistake investors make is failing to realise that everything
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
The purpose of Brexit is surely not to open London to young Vietnamese wanting to experience European culture.
Indeed that is almost the precise antithesis of what the Brexit vote was about.
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
Lots of London specific factors I think. I wouldn't read too much into the brexit angle, although surely people are putting off big decisions until there is a bit more clarity.
I do wonder whether "prime" London has just moved and it is taking decades for people to fully notice. It hasn't made sense for anyone normal and under 40 to move to (insert traditionally posh bit of London here) for a long long time.
Prices in Leamington are still climbing. It could just be London houses got too expensive. I’m with SeanT on this: a correction, not a slump - especially as commercial property does still seem to be in high demand.
The only infrastructure needed to run the system are number plate recognition cameras on approach roads to the border itself.
But that could anger nationalists who will say it break Mrs May’s promise of no infrastructure at all.
The Fujitsu system could also be rejected by the Northern Irish who have a deep dislike of state surveillance that dates back to the Troubles era
On the one hand I get both of these. On the other hand, that'd just be bloody unreasonable if this idea were shown to be capable of working. Cameras would be too much?
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
Why the Irish don't abandon their failed republic and restore the queen of Ireland to her throne is beyond me, it'd solve so many problems
The mystery to me is why we think there is any benefit whatsoever from holding onto the six counties.
Polling shows time and again that most mainland Brits, certainly most English people, don't give a fuck about Ulster (in the nicest possible way) and would be quite content for Ireland to reunify.
I should add that I am not one of them: I am a Brit and a Celt and I think the whole nation benefits from being four nations.
But I have to accept most of my fellow Englishmen and women do not share my attachment.
The Irish attitude to reunification is equally intriguing: they desire it in a spiritual, St Augustine-and-celibacy kind of way, but when asked how they feel about it happening NOW then they quail. At least that's the mood I pick up from their media, which I have been following recently
I've also noted that the Irish still suffer a martyr complex, despite benefiting intensely from the EU, and the UK's generosity therein. e.g. Varadkar recently claimed that Ireland was being "victimised" by Brexit.
You what? The UK wishes to be independent, and somehow that makes Ireland a "victim"? Fuck off.
The northern Irish to me seem to have the attitude of expats who by some quirk of history are still living here.
I expect Americans would be similar if their ancestors had neglected to exterminate the natives.
American history about the revolution is still absurdly mythological and hyberbolic.
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I would have thought someone would have tried a revisionist line over there by now. But, no. None.
They also conveniently skip over the American Loyalists. The American Revolution was substantially a Civil War, and there was considerable sympathy on these islands for the revolutionaries too.
The troops of Banastre Tarleton were substantially American Loyalists, not British as depicted in "The Patriot" by Mel Gibson:
A neighbour and friend of mine is Tarleton’s heir. Almost everything about that movie is wrong and offensively so (essentially they took everybcrime committed by either side in the war and attached it to Tarleton)
Why the Irish don't abandon their failed republic and restore the queen of Ireland to her throne is beyond me, it'd solve so many problems
The mystery to me is why we think there is any benefit whatsoever from holding onto the six counties.
Polling shows time and again that most mainland Brits, certainly most English people, don't give a fuck about Ulster (in the nicest possible way) and would be quite content for Ireland to reunify.
I should add that I am not one of them: I am a Brit and a Celt and I think the whole nation benefits from being four nations.
But I have to accept most of my fellow Englishmen and women do not share my attachment.
The Irish attitude to reunification is equally intriguing: they desire it in a spiritual, St Augustine-and-celibacy kind of way, but when asked how they feel about it happening NOW then they quail. At least that's the mood I pick up from their media, which I have been following recently
I've
You what? The UK wishes to be independent, and somehow that makes Ireland a "victim"? Fuck off.
The northern Irish to me seem to have the attitude of expats who by some quirk of history are still living here.
I expect Americans would be similar if their ancestors had neglected to exterminate the natives.
American history about the revolution is still absurdly mythological and hyberbolic.
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I would have thought someone would have tried a revisionist line over there by now. But, no. None.
They also conveniently skip over the American Loyalists. The American Revolution was substantially a Civil War, and there was considerable sympathy on these islands for the revolutionaries too.
The troops of Banastre Tarleton were substantially American Loyalists, not British as depicted in "The Patriot" by Mel Gibson:
The ERG continue to move the goal posts . They really are a disgusting bunch who want a no deal and could care less how that effects the country .
Any chance they can be paraded as traitors by the media or is that only reserved for the saner members of the Tory party !
There must be a psychological term for fearing what you want the most so much that you deliberately stop yourself getting it, for fear that the rest of your life would have no meaning.
Interesting point . I’ve said all along the only ones who can lead to no Brexit are the ERG nutjobs who never quit whilst they were winning . If the Tories over see a no deal then they’re toast even against Corbyn .
But 12m ago he reduced his risk exposure to London property from 66% to 50% - effectively pricing in a 25% fall in prices.
Scanning the thread I read that as "12m years ago" and found it completely unsurprising that his financial planning would take account of such timescales.
One of my cousins believes that if the economy grows faster than a tree (about 2.4% I think) then it is dangerously unsustainable
I had no idea property prices were slumping in London. The newly combined, 400 person business I’m now part of is looking for offices in the centre of town and the pricing is astronomical. Should we be holding off?
Bizarrely, London office prices are holding up well, it is prime London residential which is hurting quite badly.
American history about the revolution is still absurdly mythological and hyberbolic.
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I visited the museum of the revolution in Philadelphia recently. Worth a visit.
I had not realised the "taxation without representation" they were so miffed about was Stamp Duty. My American friends couldn't comprehend that we still pay it.
I think I'd enjoy that.
The root cause of the Revolution is simply that English people went over there who didn't really want to be governed. Period. This would have included those with ultra religious or unorthodox political views who didn't fit in with the consensus of Anglican settlement here. And they weren't really from the 1660s onwards. England, then Britain, barely remembered they existed.
As soon as Westminster tried to legislate, and they didn't really need troops for security, it was all going to kick off. And if it hadn't been over import duty it would have been over something else instead.
Might another round of devaluation post-Brexit help, simply by making UK exports more attractive and reducing our ability to purchase imported goods?
Of couryou may be able to afford luxuries - short of a lottery win or a bequest - is to buy them all on credit.)
How low can it go?
Who can it negotiations.
I made a nict upward bounce in £/$ and £/€.
I disaster.
If I was a
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The biggest mistake investors make is failing to realise that everything is cyclical. When IBut London has already passed its peak, is becoming less attractive to live as family communties are replaced by dormitories for the youth of the world, and Brexit will accelerate the trend for foreign disinvestment. Yes, Tokyo in 1990 is a very apt comparison. Back then, there were plenty of people who thought you couldn't lose buying property there.
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
Back in the day when I lived in Spain in the 80s/90s Dublin did very well out of anxious parents sending their daughters there to learn English far away from the depravities of London. I guess that’s probably changed now, but Ireland has always had very strong links with southern Europe generally. Catholicism, I suppose.
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
It's about a hub and spoke approach so regional cities can tap into London as the global hub. Thus they can attract business and services investment too.
It's remarkable how often this rather obviously simply point isn't understood.
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
It's about a hub and spoke approach so regional cities can tap into London as the global hub. Thus they can attract business and services investment too.
It's remarkable how often this rather obviously simply point isn't understood.
I think we perhaps underestimate the untapped brand value of regional cities in their own right.
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The bigges
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
Twit. Go to Sydney. It is full of aspiring young Vietnamese (and Sydney has been a boomtown for three decades running).
Young hardworking inventive computer-savvy pho-making high-IQ East Asian kids - like the Vietnamese (who won't mug you or blow you up or put their women in black death-shrouds) are EXACTLY the kind of migrant you want to attract, if you aspire to be a dynamic world city.
Time will tell.
You felt sure your Brexit bet with Mr Glenn was a sure fire winner, two years ago. Tbf, you may still win, by dint of selecting an end 2019 date, but your sure fire winner looks decidely an each way bet in current circumstances.
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The biggest mistake investors make is failing to realise that everything
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
The purpose of Brexit is surely not to open London to young Vietnamese wanting to experience European culture.
Indeed that is almost the precise antithesis of what the Brexit vote was about.
No it isn't. It was about saving Britain from being inevitably absorbed into a federal European state and preserving its political independence.
Please, let's no go round this well worn old circle yet again.
The only infrastructure needed to run the system are number plate recognition cameras on approach roads to the border itself.
But that could anger nationalists who will say it break Mrs May’s promise of no infrastructure at all.
The Fujitsu system could also be rejected by the Northern Irish who have a deep dislike of state surveillance that dates back to the Troubles era
On the one hand I get both of these. On the other hand, that'd just be bloody unreasonable if this idea were shown to be capable of working. Cameras would be too much?
Did they complain when the Republic put up speed signs in kmph ?
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
It's about a hub and spoke approach so regional cities can tap into London as the global hub. Thus they can attract business and services investment too.
It's remarkable how often this rather obviously simply point isn't understood.
I think we perhaps underestimate the untapped brand value of regional cities in their own right.
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
Speaking as someone who can see HS2 from his window I think HS2 is an insane waste of money and time. If we really want to spend eighty billion quid on transport we should build Heathrow 3 tomorrow and improve transport across the North with fast regular electric trains from Liverpool to Manchester to Leeds and back, turning the great northern cities into one conurbation.
Shaving 20 minutes off the train time from London to Brum is utterly pointless and, as you say, will merely encourage more people to commute to London and work in London, from further out.
Also, driverless electric cars. They will be ubiquitous by the time HS2 is finished. The whole thing is nuts. I genuinely don't understand why ANYONE wants it.
There's lots of vested interests making lots of money from it.
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The bigges
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
Twit. Go to Sydney. It is full of aspiring young Vietnamese (and Sydney has been a boomtown for three decades running).
Young hardworking inventive computer-savvy pho-making high-IQ East Asian kids - like the Vietnamese (who won't mug you or blow you up or put their women in black death-shrouds) are EXACTLY the kind of migrant you want to attract, if you aspire to be a dynamic world city.
Time will tell.
You felt sure your Brexit bet with Mr Glenn was a sure fire winner, two years ago. Tbf, you may still win, by dint of selecting an end 2019 date, but your sure fire winner looks decidely an each way bet in current circumstances.
I think for you Brexit is exactly what this argument is about.
You want to argue that London is fucked, so you are arguing that London is fucked.
It isn't, and it won't be, but that won't stop you from pushing this fatalist dystopian porn, because Brexit.
Well, i am off to bed shortly. But if anyone wants to know why I am so frustrated and fed up at matters in education, here is a model answer to a question about the Battle of Hastings from AQA. This is quoted from the actual mark scheme that was used last year to mark real GCSEs.
'The interpretation is convincing because it acknowledges Harold’s possibly daring brilliance as a commander. To have beaten off the first invasion at Stamford Bridge and then taken up a good defensive position on Senlac Hill blocking the road to London. He had roughly the same number of troops as William and deployed them with a shield wall. His troops lasted nearly the whole day to hold their position and beat off the Normans.'
That's for the PERFECT answer. The model that got 8 out of 8.
And do you know what's frightening?
That's still not the most epic fuck up from the new exams. Amanda Spielmann buggering up the marking criteria because she's so dumb she can't count to nine still takes first.
Good night.
FFS that’s depressing. It’s like saying we won the American war of independence apart from all the defeats and our eventual surrender.
Not really. I am afraid ydoethur is showing he is a teacher first and a historian second. Most historians of the period recognise that Harold was indeed a great commander. Faced with an almost impossible situation of fighting off two invasions in succession - one against an army which had already beaten part of his army before he arrived - he did far better than many might have expected. That he lost was not down to his being a poor commander but down to circumstances largely beyond his control. It would be fair to say he was a poor diplomat perhaps but certainly not a poor commander.
Didn't ydoethur bold the last sentence for a reason? I.e., he wasn't objecting to the earlier characterisation of him as a great military leader, but an ending sentence that was gramatically poor, and which implied that the Normans were "beaten off".
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The bigges
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
Twit. Go to Sydney. It is full of aspiring young Vietnamese (and Sydney has been a boomtown for three decades running).
Young hardworking inventive computer-savvy pho-making high-IQ East Asian kids - like the Vietnamese (who won't mug you or blow you up or put their women in black death-shrouds) are EXACTLY the kind of migrant you want to attract, if you aspire to be a dynamic world city.
That is fuelling the Pauline Hansons of Australia and Winston Peters in NZ. There is a lot of anti-Asian sentiment there, much like the resentment here behind Brexit.
The opening scene of the brilliant but controversal Romper Stomper, shows how this has been brewing for a while. It was based on a true story.
This is hysterical nonsense. The EEC always had free movement from its founding with the Treaty of Rome. As far as I can make out, if you object to anything concrete it's really the eastern expansion of the EU.
As usual, it seems you need a history lesson. When we (along with Eire and Denmark) joined in 1973 we brought some quite poor areas into the then EEC. Areas like Cornwall, the Scottish Highlands and of course the Republic were relatively poor compared to the rest of the EEC at that time. The largesse available went to these areas - Cornwall did very well in terms of infrastructure from Objective One funding as did Wales and the Highlands.
The admission of Greece in 1981 and later Portugal and Spain changed things. The accession of these countries changed the economic dynamic by bringing in areas which were relatively even poorer than the poorer areas of the UK so money went from the EEC to support rural Spain, Greece and Portugal and the previously well funded areas of the UK lost out.
Fast forward to the accession of the post Communist countries and in to the EEC/EU came a raft of even more impoverished areas. The Polish economy in GDP terms in 1988 was barely a third of that of Sweden. That unbalanced and distorted the EU and led to the north and west spaying for the east and to an extent the south.
The cynic might argue it also created a large pool of cheap labour for the richer economies to draw on but for various reasons conservatives, socialists and liberals were all in favour of expanding the EU - I wasn't. I'd have encouraged investment in the post-Communist countries and allowed a much longer transition period before full admission but that wasn't the thinking.
Is Greece poorer than the inland areas of North Wales? Or indeed Anglesey? Serious question.
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
Speaking as someone who can see HS2 from his window I think HS2 is an insane waste of money and time. If we really want to spend eighty billion quid on transport we should build Heathrow 3 tomorrow and improve transport across the North with fast regular electric trains from Liverpool to Manchester to Leeds and back, turning the great northern cities into one conurbation.
Shaving 20 minutes off the train time from London to Brum is utterly pointless and, as you say, will merely encourage more people to commute to London and work in London, from further out.
Also, driverless electric cars. They will be ubiquitous by the time HS2 is finished. The whole thing is nuts. I genuinely don't understand why ANYONE wants it.
There's lots of vested interests making lots of money from it.
Rail capacity going north from London is already full. So we need new railways, and if we re going to build one, it may as well be a modern fast one. How complicated is that to understand?
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
Speaking as someone who can see HS2 from his window I think HS2 is an insane waste of money and time. If we really want to spend eighty billion quid on transport we should build Heathrow 3 tomorrow and improve transport across the North with fast regular electric trains from Liverpool to Manchester to Leeds and back, turning the great northern cities into one conurbation.
Shaving 20 minutes off the train time from London to Brum is utterly pointless and, as you say, will merely encourage more people to commute to London and work in London, from further out.
Also, driverless electric cars. They will be ubiquitous by the time HS2 is finished. The whole thing is nuts. I genuinely don't understand why ANYONE wants it.
There's lots of vested interests making lots of money from it.
Rail capacity going north from London is already full. So we need new railways, and if we re going to build one, it may as well be a modern fast one. How complicated is that to understand?
The "20 minute" shaving meme is perhaps the most all pervasive fallacy of all the arguments against HS2. But it's got one hell of a lot of traction.
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The bigges
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
Twit. Go to Sydney. It is full of aspiring young Vietnamese (and Sydney has been a boomtown for three decades running).
Young hardworking inventive computer-savvy pho-making high-IQ East Asian kids - like the Vietnamese (who won't mug you or blow you up or put their women in black death-shrouds) are EXACTLY the kind of migrant you want to attract, if you aspire to be a dynamic world city.
Time will tell.
You felt sure your Brexit bet with Mr Glenn was a sure fire winner, two years ago. Tbf, you may still win, by dint of selecting an end 2019 date, but your sure fire winner looks decidely an each way bet in current circumstances.
I think for you Brexit is exactly what this argument is about.
You want to argue that London is fucked, so you are arguing that London is fucked.
It isn't, and it won't be, but that won't stop you from pushing this fatalist dystopian porn, because Brexit.
Let's just wait and see. Prices are already falling, and whether or not this continues won't rest upon my own opinion, or yours.
Well, i am off to bed shortly. But if anyone wants to know why I am so frustrated and fed up at matters in education, here is a model answer to a question about the Battle of Hastings from AQA. This is quoted from the actual mark scheme that was used last year to mark real GCSEs.
'The interpretation is convincing because it acknowledges Harold’s possibly daring brilliance as a commander. To have beaten off the first invasion at Stamford Bridge and then taken up a good defensive position on Senlac Hill blocking the road to London. He had roughly the same number of troops as William and deployed them with a shield wall. His troops lasted nearly the whole day to hold their position and beat off the Normans.'
That's for the PERFECT answer. The model that got 8 out of 8.
And do you know what's frightening?
That's still not the most epic fuck up from the new exams. Amanda Spielmann buggering up the marking criteria because she's so dumb she can't count to nine still takes first.
Good night.
FFS that’s depressing. It’s like saying we won the American war of independence apart from all the defeats and our eventual surrender.
Not really. I am afraid ydoethur is showing he is a teacher first and a historian second. Most historians of the period recognise that Harold was indeed a great commander. Faced with an almost impossible situation of fighting off two invasions in succession - one against an army which had already beaten part of his army before he arrived - he did far better than many might have expected. That he lost was not down to his being a poor commander but down to circumstances largely beyond his control. It would be fair to say he was a poor diplomat perhaps but certainly not a poor commander.
Which implied that the Normans were "beaten off".
Well, that might have been one way to defeat the Normans.
This is hysterical nonsense. The EEC always had free movement from its founding with the Treaty of Rome. As far as I can make out, if you object to anything concrete it's really the eastern expansion of the EU.
As usual, it seems you need a history lesson. When we (along with Eire and Denmark) joined in 1973 we brought some quite poor areas into the then EEC. Areas like Cornwall, the Scottish Highlands and of course the Republic were relatively poor compared to the rest of the EEC at that time. The largesse available went to these areas - Cornwall did very well in terms of infrastructure from Objective One funding as did Wales and the Highlands.
The admission of Greece in 1981 and later Portugal and Spain changed things. The accession of these countries changed the economic dynamic by bringing in areas which were relatively even poorer than the poorer areas of the UK so money went from the EEC to support rural Spain, Greece and Portugal and the previously well funded areas of the UK lost out.
Fast forward to the accession of the post Communist countries and in to the EEC/EU came a raft of even more impoverished areas. The Polish economy in GDP terms in 1988 was barely a third of that of Sweden. That unbalanced and distorted the EU and led to the north and west spaying for the east and to an extent the south.
The cynic might argue it also created a large pool of cheap labour for the richer economies to draw on but for various reasons conservatives, socialists and liberals were all in favour of expanding the EU - I wasn't. I'd have encouraged investment in the post-Communist countries and allowed a much longer transition period before full admission but that wasn't the thinking.
Is Greece poorer than the inland areas of North Wales? Or indeed Anglesey? Serious question.
It would be today.
Doesn't it depend where in Greece? I would expect that Thessalonaki or Athens would be richer, but the rest poorer.
You are assuming that we’d recreate BR, which there is no good reason to do. Other countries manage perfectly well with their railways in the public sector - why are we so down on our own abilities? It’s embarrassing
Because our record of public ownership has been frankly atrocious. I don't trust the Government (any Government of any party in this country) to get basic state things like collecting taxes right. Why on earth would I want to let them within a million miles of the railways again?
That, and what's the first thing that happens if Labour renationalises the railways? They'll freeze the fares to appease angry commuters. And who are the angry commuters? Disproportionately, they're wealthy or comfortably-off workers, and disproportionately they're concentrated in the South-East of England.
Ergo, bringing the railways back into public ownership = yet more sweeties for the richest part of the country, which I thought was the sort of thing we were meant to be trying to get away from.
And then, going forward, either the trains are starved of investment because most Government spending increases are set aside for the NHS and pensions, or if it does happen it therefore comes increasingly from general taxation rather than from fare revenues. Better trains for comfortably-off commuters would end up coming out of everybody's income, including that of a great many poor people and those in rural areas who may seldom (if ever) travel by train, but will get to watch more of their money being spent so that the aforementioned commuters may enjoy the privilege of an improved railway without having to cough up more for their tickets.
Finite resources would be better spent on bus services, which are dying on their wheels in most of the country outside of London.
Let the failing parts of the country rot. They voted to sabotage the successful bits through Brexit. Let them figure out a way to recover that doesn’t involve sponging off the bits of the country that they hate.
If there’s any kind of social compact, which I doubt, it requires society’s losers not actively to impede society’s dynamos. To do so and then to bleat that the money is not flowing enough is a bit much for me.
The poor, and poor districts, have been voting Labour since1922. I'd rather they did not, but I'd rather see some of my income go to them than have to live in a society like South Africa or El Salvador.
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
Speaking as someone who can see HS2 from his window I think HS2 is an insane waste of money and time. If we really want to spend eighty billion quid on transport we should build Heathrow 3 tomorrow and improve transport across the North with fast regular electric trains from Liverpool to Manchester to Leeds and back, turning the great northern cities into one conurbation.
Shaving 20 minutes off the train time from London to Brum is utterly pointless and, as you say, will merely encourage more people to commute to London and work in London, from further out.
Also, driverless electric cars. They will be ubiquitous by the time HS2 is finished. The whole thing is nuts. I genuinely don't understand why ANYONE wants it.
There's lots of vested interests making lots of money from it.
Rail capacity going north from London is already full. So we need new railways, and if we re going to build one, it may as well be a modern fast one. How complicated is that to understand?
Just from my own personal experience during the last couple of years there's more congestion on trains within the North than on trains between the North and London.
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The biggest mistake investors make is failing to realise that everything
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
I met lots of young
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
The purpose of Brexit is surely not to open London to young Vietnamese wanting to experience European culture.
Indeed that is almost the precise antithesis of what the Brexit vote was about.
No it isn't. It was about saving Britain from being inevitably absorbed into a federal European state and preserving its political independence.
Please, let's no go round this well worn old circle yet again.
Dislike of London, and other Metropolitan areas with their cultural diversity, and strong economies based around a knowledge economy was just a part of the rancid, jealous rage of Brexitism, but a fairly core one. Or do you really think that the purpose was to kick out the Poles so that they could make way for the Vietnamese?
Just had news that one of my grand daughters teachers was killed on the Euston-Holyhead line at Abergele early this morning. She is reported to have two children
The teaching staff and students are in understandable turmoil.
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
Speaking as someone who can see HS2 from his window I think HS2 is an insane waste of money and time. If we really want to spend eighty billion quid on transport we should build Heathrow 3 tomorrow and improve transport across the North with fast regular electric trains from Liverpool to Manchester to Leeds and back, turning the great northern cities into one conurbation.
Shaving 20 minutes off the train time from London to Brum is utterly pointless and, as you say, will merely encourage more people to commute to London and work in London, from further out.
Also, driverless electric cars. They will be ubiquitous by the time HS2 is finished. The whole thing is nuts. I genuinely don't understand why ANYONE wants it.
There's lots of vested interests making lots of money from it.
Rail capacity going north from London is already full. So we need new railways, and if we re going to build one, it may as well be a modern fast one. How complicated is that to understand?
My next door neighbours daughter is very active on the HS2 project which is full speed ahead apparently
Corbyn has held out a lot longer than I thought he would on many things relating to Brexit, particularly when Starmer has been obviously seeking to take them further in certain directions.
And apropos of nothing, but since I read this (very long) profile very early in the morning during a bout of insomnia, I cannot get over how utterly crazy are the claims around this author Dan Mallory.
It was interesting, but I must admit the examples of Mallory/Finn's writing and accounts of his magnetic wit and charm seemed underwhelming. One obviously had to be there to fall for the latter.
I was (and would still be if I read much any more) a big fan of the Ripley books, apparently a big influence on Mallory. To me the fictional creation of a charming psychopath seems more convincing than the recounted facts about Mr Mallory.
Why the Irish don't abandon their failed republic and restore the queen of Ireland to her throne is beyond me, it'd solve so many problems
The mystery to me is why we think there is any benefit whatsoever from holding onto the six counties.
Polling shows time and again that most mainland Brits, certainly most English people, don't give a fuck about Ulster (in the nicest possible way) and would be quite content for Ireland to reunify.
I should add that I am not one of them: I am a Brit and a Celt and I think the whole nation benefits from being four nations.
But I have to accept most of my fellow Englishmen and women do not share my attachment.
The Irish attitude to reunification is equally intriguing: they desire it in a spiritual, St Augustine-and-celibacy kind of way, but when asked how they feel about it happening NOW then they quail. At least that's the mood I pick up from their media, which I have been following recently
I've also noted that the Irish still suffer a martyr complex, despite benefiting intensely from the EU, and the UK's generosity therein. e.g. Varadkar recently claimed that Ireland was being "victimised" by Brexit.
You what? The UK wishes to be independent, and somehow that makes Ireland a "victim"? Fuck off.
The northern Irish to me seem to have the attitude of expats who by some quirk of history are still living here.
I expect Americans would be similar if their ancestors had neglected to exterminate the natives.
American history about the revolution is still absurdly mythological and hyberbolic.
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I would have thought someone would have tried a revisionist line over there by now. But, no. None.
They also conveniently skip over the American Loyalists. The American Revolution was substantially a Civil War, and there was considerable sympathy on these islands for the revolutionaries too.
The troops of Banastre Tarleton were substantially American Loyalists, not British as depicted in "The Patriot" by Mel Gibson:
Why the Irish don't abandon their failed republic and restore the queen of Ireland to her throne is beyond me, it'd solve so many problems
The mystery to me is why we think there is any benefit whatsoever from holding onto the six counties.
Polling shows time and again that most mainland Brits, certainly most English people, don't give a fuck about Ulster (in the nicest possible way) and would be quite content for Ireland to reunify.
I should add that I am not one of them: I am a Brit and a Celt and I think the whole nation benefits from being four nations.
But I have to accept most of my fellow Englishmen and women do not share my attachment.
The Irish attitude to reunification is equally intriguing: they desire it in a spiritual, St Augustine-and-celibacy kind of way, but when asked how they feel about it happening NOW then they quail. At least that's the mood I pick up from their media, which I have been following recently
, despite benefiting intensely from the EU, and the UK's generosity therein. e.g. Varadkar recently claimed that Ireland was being "victimised" by Brexit.
You what? The UK wishes to be independent, and somehow that makes Ireland a "victim"? Fuck off.
The northern Irish to me seem to have the attitude of expats who by some quirk of history are still living here.
I expect Americans would be similar if their ancestors had neglected to exterminate the natives.
American history about the revolution is still absurdly mythological and hyberbolic.
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I would have thought someone would have tried a revisionist line over there by now. But, no. None.
They also conveniently skip over the American Loyalists. The American Revolution was substantially a Civil War, and there was considerable sympathy on these islands for the revolutionaries too.
The troops of Banastre Tarleton were substantially American Loyalists, not British as depicted in "The Patriot" by Mel Gibson:
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
Nah. I used to think that too, that being connected to London might spread its sociocultural qualities afield. The truth is more utilitarian. High speed rail is just a quicker way of getting to the greatest city in the world.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
Speaking as someone who can see HS2 from his window I think HS2 is an insane waste of money and time. If we really want to spend eighty billion quid on transport we should build Heathrow 3 tomorrow and improve transport across the North with fast regular electric trains from Liverpool to Manchester to Leeds and back, turning the great northern cities into one conurbation.
Shaving 20 minutes off the train time from London to Brum is utterly pointless and, as you say, will merely encourage more people to commute to London and work in London, from further out.
Also, driverless electric cars. They will be ubiquitous by the time HS2 is finished. The whole thing is nuts. I genuinely don't understand why ANYONE wants it.
There's lots of vested interests making lots of money from it.
Rail capacity going north from London is already full. So we need new railways, and if we re going to build one, it may as well be a modern fast one. How complicated is that to understand?
Just from my own personal experience during the last couple of years there's more congestion on trains within the North than on trains between the North and London.
There's over 40 trains from London KX to Leeds tomorrow - everyone of them has both standard and first class tickets still available.
Sadly I'm not a billionaire so I'm thinking of buying a very small plot of land in Spain, just for the giggles (and the sun).
Only ivate jet.
The Fwn small way) in London property, I can't take the risk.
The biggest mistake investors make is failing to realise that everything
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
I met lots of young
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
The purpose of Brexit is surely not to open London to young Vietnamese wanting to experience European culture.
Indeed that is almost the precise antithesis of what the Brexit vote was about.
No it isn't. It was about saving Britain from being inevitably absorbed into a federal European state and preserving its political independence.
Please, let's no go round this well worn old circle yet again.
Dislike of London, and other Metropolitan areas with their cultural diversity, and strong economies based around a knowledge economy was just a part of the rancid, jealous rage of Brexitism, but a fairly core one. Or do you really think that the purpose was to kick out the Poles so that they could make way for the Vietnamese?
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
Nah. I used to think that too, that being connected to London might spread its sociocultural qualities afield. The truth is more utilitarian. High speed rail is just a quicker way of getting to the greatest city in the world.
Those two things aren't mutually exclusive.
You can easily test this by making the counter argument: is it better when regional cities are even more poorly connected grounds it would stop talent, energy and commerce leaching out to London?
Maybe I am biassed, as a Londoner, but I think this is bollocks. Why do I think this? Here's one reason: I've just come back from a Times travel gig in Vietnam (which is fascinating, by the way, and has utterly brilliant, phenomenal food, arguably the best cuisine in the world).
I met lots of young
Tokyo is the 90s was a city fiercely resistant to immigration, speaking a language spoken by no one else, and far away from the global centres of culture.
London is not Tokyo. It will bounce back.
That a lot of young and relatively poor Vietnamese wanting to come to London is key to its better properties continuing to appreciate in value is an interesting theory, for sure.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
The purpose of Brexit is surely not to open London to young Vietnamese wanting to experience European culture.
Indeed that is almost the precise antithesis of what the Brexit vote was about.
No it isn't. It was about saving Britain from being inevitably absorbed into a federal European state and preserving its political independence.
Please, let's no go round this well worn old circle yet again.
Dislike of London, and other Metropolitan areas with their cultural diversity, and strong economies based around a knowledge economy was just a part of the rancid, jealous rage of Brexitism, but a fairly core one. Or do you really think that the purpose was to kick out the Poles so that they could make way for the Vietnamese?
Some of that cultural diversity:
' A woman who mutilated her three-year-old daughter has become the first person in the UK to be found guilty of female genital mutilation (FGM).
The 37-year-old mother from east London wept in the dock as she was convicted after a trial at the Old Bailey.
Spells and curses intended to deter police and social workers from investigating were found at the Ugandan woman's home, the trial heard. '
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
"Come to Birmingham, it's got a fast train to London" doesn't inspire.
Speaking as someone who can see HS2 from his window I think HS2 is an insane waste of money and time. If we really want to spend eighty billion quid on transport we should build Heathrow 3 tomorrow and improve transport across the North with fast regular electric trains from Liverpool to Manchester to Leeds and back, turning the great northern cities into one conurbation.
Shaving 20 minutes off the train time from London to Brum is utterly pointless and, as you say, will merely encourage more people to commute to London and work in London, from further out.
Also, driverless electric cars. They will be ubiquitous by the time HS2 is finished. The whole thing is nuts. I genuinely don't understand why ANYONE wants it.
There's lots of vested interests making lots of money from it.
Rail capacity going north from London is already full. So we need new railways, and if we re going to build one, it may as well be a modern fast one. How complicated is that to understand?
My next door neighbours daughter is very active on the HS2 project which is full speed ahead apparently
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
Nah. I used to think that too, that being connected to London might spread its sociocultural qualities afield. The truth is more utilitarian. High speed rail is just a quicker way of getting to the greatest city in the world.
Those two things aren't mutually exclusive.
You can easily test this by making the counter argument: is it better when regional cities are even more poorly connected grounds it would stop talent, energy and commerce leaching out to London?
In reality, there is a multiplier effect.
Oh, I agree. Build HS2 and everything else, ASAP. Getting down here quick is good for everyone, businesses, people, everyone.
I had no idea property prices were slumping in London. The newly combined, 400 person business I’m now part of is looking for offices in the centre of town and the pricing is astronomical. Should we be holding off?
At a guess, the fact that mass Brexit-related redundancies are not being announced all over the City would suggest that demand for business customers may still be holding up (i.e. if there is a slump it's residential.) One certainly reads enough stories in the papers of prime central London apartments lying empty and, thinking of thirtysomethings, surely unless one were either very rich or very desperate to stay in the capital, one would move out to the commuter belt when going from renting to buying?
There'd be nothing inconsistent in office space remaining at a premium whilst residential property underwent a significant correction.
Interestingly, prime London office rents basically flatlined at £42-50/square foot from 1985 to 2012. It's only recently they've gone through the roof.
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
I thought it was to enable Manchester United fans to get to the game.
Because our record of public ownership has been frankly atrocious. I don't trust the Government (any Government of any party in this country) to get basic state things like collecting taxes right. Why on earth would I want to let them within a million miles of the railways again?
So why did you think they would be equal to the task of disentangling the UK from 40 years of political, commercial and economic integration with the EU?
I met lots of young and dynamic Vietnamese people (they are all young and dynamic). Where did they want to study and live for a while? London. They weren't being polite to me as a Brit, they were being honest: they wanted to experience a world class English speaking city (where they could improve their English), but they also wanted close access to European culture, art, history. There is only one city which can provide this, and it is London, for all of Dublin's charms.
I think tapping into this effect would be a good thing for regional development strategies to focus on so that it's not just about London.
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
That's what HS2 is supposed to be about.
Nah. I used to think that too, that being connected to London might spread its sociocultural qualities afield. The truth is more utilitarian. High speed rail is just a quicker way of getting to the greatest city in the world.
Those two things aren't mutually exclusive.
You can easily test this by making the counter argument: is it better when regional cities are even more poorly connected grounds it would stop talent, energy and commerce leaching out to London?
Comments
They portray the Redcoats as Nazis (usually with "baddie" music playing, to ram the point home) and the Patriots as heroic and noble farmers fighting impossible odds.
I would have thought someone would have tried a revisionist line over there by now. But, no. None.
Well it wasn’t quite one in the eye like poor Harold but the fact is we lost. As did he.
Of course, they may value different things and not see the world in quite the same way, but that's not the same thing.
I had not realised the "taxation without representation" they were so miffed about was Stamp Duty. My American friends couldn't comprehend that we still pay it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dordogne#Politics
Difficult to imagine the Cotswolds or Herefordshire with that voting pattern.
Therefore, i'd always expect a market in any reasonably sized town for a place where people can meet, drink and eat.
But 12m ago he reduced his risk exposure to London property from 66% to 50% - effectively pricing in a 25% fall in prices.
If you have that million, buy somewhere in the countryside with genuine quality of life.
And that was supposedly caused by the tea act (whatever that was).
Thanks for the link.
Though much of the credit should go to:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Claudius_Marcellus
And apropos of nothing, but since I read this (very long) profile very early in the morning during a bout of insomnia, I cannot get over how utterly crazy are the claims around this author Dan Mallory.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/02/11/a-suspense-novelists-trail-of-deceptions
The troops of Banastre Tarleton were substantially American Loyalists, not British as depicted in "The Patriot" by Mel Gibson:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Legion_(American_Revolution)
There'd be nothing inconsistent in office space remaining at a premium whilst residential property underwent a significant correction.
http://www.cityam.com/271957/take-up-london-office-space-rises-2018-ends-bang
It may be different for Mayfair mansions and foreign investor owned new-build Battersea flats.
What if what London is progressively becoming makes it a less attractive place for better off people to live? As happened during the earlier part of our lifetimes.
I do wonder whether "prime" London has just moved and it is taking decades for people to fully notice. It hasn't made sense for anyone normal and under 40 to move to (insert traditionally posh bit of London here) for a long long time.
Any chance they can be paraded as traitors by the media or is that only reserved for the saner members of the Tory party !
Even the premier league exerts a strange kind of soft power. Wolverhampton is famous in China because a Chinese rock band are fans of the football team and made a song about them.
Indeed that is almost the precise antithesis of what the Brexit vote was about.
But that could anger nationalists who will say it break Mrs May’s promise of no infrastructure at all.
The Fujitsu system could also be rejected by the Northern Irish who have a deep dislike of state surveillance that dates back to the Troubles era
On the one hand I get both of these. On the other hand, that'd just be bloody unreasonable if this idea were shown to be capable of working. Cameras would be too much?
Of course, a decent number of them ended up in Canada and, in no small part, influenced what it's like today.
https://www.rics.org/globalassets/rics-website/media/knowledge/research/market-surveys/rics-uk-commercial-property-market-survey-q4-2018.pdf
The root cause of the Revolution is simply that English people went over there who didn't really want to be governed. Period. This would have included those with ultra religious or unorthodox political views who didn't fit in with the consensus of Anglican settlement here. And they weren't really from the 1660s onwards. England, then Britain, barely remembered they existed.
As soon as Westminster tried to legislate, and they didn't really need troops for security, it was all going to kick off. And if it hadn't been over import duty it would have been over something else instead.
It's remarkable how often this rather obviously simply point isn't understood.
You felt sure your Brexit bet with Mr Glenn was a sure fire winner, two years ago. Tbf, you may still win, by dint of selecting an end 2019 date, but your sure fire winner looks decidely an each way bet in current circumstances.
Please, let's no go round this well worn old circle yet again.
You want to argue that London is fucked, so you are arguing that London is fucked.
It isn't, and it won't be, but that won't stop you from pushing this fatalist dystopian porn, because Brexit.
The opening scene of the brilliant but controversal Romper Stomper, shows how this has been brewing for a while. It was based on a true story.
https://youtu.be/StNJ4_ni37o
No pun intended.
(* Leavers - I'll say it for you, Despite Brexit!)
The teaching staff and students are in understandable turmoil.
It is so sad
I was (and would still be if I read much any more) a big fan of the Ripley books, apparently a big influence on Mallory. To me the fictional creation of a charming psychopath seems more convincing than the recounted facts about Mr Mallory.
There's over 40 trains from London KX to Leeds tomorrow - everyone of them has both standard and first class tickets still available.
https://www.thetrainline.com/book/results?origin=2144c4ddc11461cf9b03af198933e8df&destination=6e2242b3f38bbbd8d8124e1d84d319e1&outwardDate=2019-02-06T23:00:00&outwardDateType=departAfter&journeySearchType=single&passengers[]=1989-02-05&selectedOutward=SCZAs7NLMYU=:mnGNs3bmZbo=&temporalDirection=next&transitDefinitionDirection=outward&searchId=eb88a629-4724-478a-ba5f-a9d6894b9dd2
You can easily test this by making the counter argument: is it better when regional cities are even more poorly connected grounds it would stop talent, energy and commerce leaching out to London?
In reality, there is a multiplier effect.
' A woman who mutilated her three-year-old daughter has become the first person in the UK to be found guilty of female genital mutilation (FGM).
The 37-year-old mother from east London wept in the dock as she was convicted after a trial at the Old Bailey.
Spells and curses intended to deter police and social workers from investigating were found at the Ugandan woman's home, the trial heard. '
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47094707