Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

[glasgowspur]

I must say in the many instances that Labour have already fudged up it is funny how much quieter it is on these pages compared to when the Tories were found out for any wrong doing - there would be page after page on how outrageous it all was. As has been said all along, they are all as bad as one another and many people have already expressed their regret at their 'Anyone but the Tories' reason for voting for Labour.

I am not biased towards any party because they are all full of it, but the chickens are coming home to roost with Labour and thankfully they will not be in power for long one way or another.....

One rule for you, another for me should be the motto of all political parties.
No politician should be allowed to do a self assessment, it should be handed to hmrc and forensicly examined, no politician should be allowed to set themselves up as a company to avoid tax. Set up a hmrc unit in the commons, I'd bet it would pay for itself several times over.
From Tony benn and his inheritance tax dodge to nicola sturgeons book deal being paid to a company, they are all the fudging same.

 

[Muttley]

Thanks that's really interesting.

My goal would be to taper out all private renting, especially the big companies you mention. My method would be through rent caps. This worked very successfully 100 years ago. I agree all house values will drop, but that's what you ultimately want to achieve - to get (first) home ownership back affordable again, back to its traditional 3x annual salary level

I'm totally with you. It's a complete minefield but we need to rebalance and make sure generation after generation can buy their own houses. I do feel sorry for the next gen with the current mismatch.

 

[Muttley]

One rule for you, another for me should be the motto of all political parties.
No politician should be allowed to do a self assessment, it should be handed to hmrc and forensicly examined, no politician should be allowed to set themselves up as a company to avoid tax. Set up a hmrc unit in the commons, I'd bet it would pay for itself several times over.
From Tony benn and his inheritance tax dodge to nicola sturgeons book deal being paid to a company, they are all the fudging same.

Here's the problem though. We don't want to continue with the dregs ending up as politicians like we have today. There has to be a career pyramid that you can rise and prosper like any industry. Politics is incredibly low paid especially at the bottom end. The politician money we mostly talk about comes from their own careers outside of politics. They wouldn't even be in politics if they didn't have this security blanket.

As Dom Cummings said in his infamous interview with that BBC leech Kuenssberg, there is only actually about 3 dozen intelligent people in Whitehall.

We see every day that we're not getting smart people in politics. The last 3 or 4 governments have been ridden with dumb fudges.

 

[glasgowspur]

Here's the problem though. We don't want to continue with the dregs ending up as politicians like we have today. There has to be a career pyramid that you can rise and prosper like any industry. Politics is incredibly low paid especially at the bottom end. The politician money we mostly talk about comes from their own careers outside of politics. They wouldn't even be in politics if they didn't have this security blanket.

As Dom Cummings said in his infamous interview with that BBC leech Kuenssberg, there is only actually about 3 dozen intelligent people in Whitehall.

We see every day that we're not getting smart people in politics. The last 3 or 4 governments have been ridden with dumb fudges.

Nicola sturgeon was the highest paid politician in the UK, £192k if I remember correctly, not including expenses or her extremely generous pension, £5m again if memory serves.
Not exactly chicken feed, and if that's what we need to pay to get capable politicians fair enough.
I think judging by the state of the country we can say we're not getting value for money.
However, what really boils my tinkle is the "the broadest shoulders need to carry the biggest burden" tosh, because those politicians have much broader shoulders than most but always find a way to lighten their burden.

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

Thanks that's really interesting.

My goal would be to taper out all private renting, especially the big companies you mention. My method would be through rent caps. This worked very successfully 100 years ago. I agree all house values will drop, but that's what you ultimately want to achieve - to get (first) home ownership back affordable again, back to its traditional 3x annual salary level

You can't do that though as times have moved on. 60-70% of adults in this country own a house via a mortgage. Not only would what you suggest put millions into negative equity it would also massively devalue mortgaged backed securities and destroy retail bank asset portfolios causing a repeat of the financial crisis.

 

[Glenda's Legs]

Don’t think it’s that. Personally I’d like all tax evasion and avoidance to be cracked down on. We don’t need to raise taxes, just collect the taxes that are due from mega wealthy individuals and corporations properly

Rayner was one of the more vocal critics of others but she is a hypocrite and someone who fails to take personal responsibility and accountability when caught out.

This is now the second time she’s done it. Fool me once etc

I agree with what you are saying. I just feel there is another undercurrent when anything about Rayner is reported on.

If she did truly act on advice given, where she had provided all the correct information to those advising her, then she will probably be in the clear from the Standards/Ethics enquiry.
Personally I think we will have to resign in any case as this will not go away. Whilst I feel that would be a shame for the Labour Party, Starmer set out his stall in terms of maintaining high standards in office so he has to adhere to that.

 

[Muttley]

Nicola sturgeon was the highest paid politician in the UK, £192k if I remember correctly, not including expenses or her extremely generous pension, £5m again if memory serves.
Not exactly chicken feed, and if that's what we need to pay to get capable politicians fair enough.
I think judging by the state of the country we can say we're not getting value for money.
However, what really boils my tinkle is the "the broadest shoulders need to carry the biggest burden" tosh, because those politicians have much broader shoulders than most but always find a way to lighten their burden.

You're only referencing the top end of the pyramid. In each constituency there is an office around the MP. These people get paid a pittance, and most of the local work done is voluntary.

Here's a couple of comparisons to Sturgeon

Public Sector: The highest salary at Transport for London (TfL) is for the TfL Commissioner Andy Lord, who received a total remuneration package of £639,164 in the most recent financial year, which includes a performance-related pay and retention bonus.

Private Sector: The average salary for a CEO in the UK varies significantly by company size, with median pay for a FTSE 100 CEO being around £4.79 million in 2024.

That's the reality of it unfortunately. I don't begrudge politicians a decent salary. It's not exactly a cushty 9 to 5 job.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I assume you saw what I wrote above? The previous government put in some great policies to disincentivise buy-to-let landlords.

The big 3 deterrents are:

1) Stamp Duty - made this additional to over and above what you pay on a property purchase. They first introduced 3% extra in about 2017 and recently put it up to 5%

2) Tax to HMRC - from about 2016 they phased out over 5 years the ability to offset your mortgage against your tax. It's now rent less allowable expenses that you pay tax on and most landlords are in the 40% or even 45% tax bracket. This creates significant money for the treasury.

3) Interest rates - loads of landlords use interest only mortgages. Once interest rates went up, this crippled landlords. Mine went from £350 a month to £800 when I remortgaged. This one wasn't so much of a planned policy deterrent rather than a natural one.

So find me a private landlord that can make money on a minimum 25% deposit (mandatory) with these 3 parameters. I'll give the Tories due credit. They did to private landlords exactly what you're asking. The only way you can make any money now is if house prices shoot up. Even then, when you sell you are subject to 40% capital gains tax on the profit. So there is no way you can make money.

Here's the big problem though. A large chunk of buy-to-let properties in the UK aren't owned by private individuals like myself. They are owned by companies who are getting the offset tax advantages. There is now a massive shift from private individuals to companies and about 74% of new purchases for buy-to-let purposes are now companies. The private individuals who are normally good landlords are being forced out of the market, yet we're not seeing the equivalent disincentives against the companies. I think that is because we Brexited and the government are scared to disincentivise businesses in the UK for a while.

I would also say that if you own your own house then you're in good shape. If you want second homes banned and put back in the market place then you should be prepared for your own house value to plummet. That is is the impact of what that supply and demand model would do. It would create mass negative equity in the UK. That's why we're seeing the long game from the different governments.

Yep it's a massive shift in the ownership breakdown of letting/renting market. Intentional? Who knows?.

Buy to let for amateur landlords was another investment vehicle to make the middle classes feel that little bit richer and that they might just be getting ahead. Of course, it should be all about yield and the capital gains would be a bonus. And no-one could really fail as those capital gains were always happening. I digress.

It's another nail in the coffin of the middle classes and a shift to corporate landlords/super rich just mimicking the big landowners of yesteryear. They won't be squeezed so heavily and we'll have to hope they toe the line on rules and regulations required for safe and acceptable tenanted accommodation.

Theres a whole increasing army of people that now have no option but to rent, that equals an army of 'customers' so they've stepped in.

 

[Muttley]

You can't do that though as times have moved on. 60-70% of adults in this country own a house via a mortgage. Not only would what you suggest put millions into negative equity it would also massively devalue mortgaged backed securities and destroy retail bank asset portfolios causing a repeat of the financial crisis.

I think GB and I were talking about the long game though. Those policy changes I talked about on private individual landlords took approximately a decade to implement. Even last year the 3% stamp duty became 5% as they roll out more changes. As we all know this is multi-faceted. There are also 750k empty houses in the UK apparently and no government incentive to get them back into circulation. On the flip side we can't build house quick enough for the population. When you look at the social housing crisis it gets you thinking how all these pieces fit together. It's not just about the youngsters trying to get out the rental game and onto the housing ladder.

 

[glasgowspur]

You're only referencing the top end of the pyramid. In each constituency there is an office around the MP. These people get paid a pittance, and most of the local work done is voluntary.

Here's a couple of comparisons to Sturgeon

Public Sector: The highest salary at Transport for London (TfL) is for the TfL Commissioner Andy Lord, who received a total remuneration package of £639,164 in the most recent financial year, which includes a performance-related pay and retention bonus.

Private Sector: The average salary for a CEO in the UK varies significantly by company size, with median pay for a FTSE 100 CEO being around £4.79 million in 2024.

That's the reality of it unfortunately. I don't begrudge politicians a decent salary. It's not exactly a cushty 9 to 5 job.

Performance related.
Can you imagine politicians getting performance related.
10 x over budget and six years and counting on two ferries.
Highest drugs deaths in Europe.
Ministerial scandal after scandal.
The list for sturgeon is endless.
For the package mentioned above, not value for money.
But as I said that's not the biggest issue for me, it's the absolute brass necked hypocrisy of it, "we need more tax, you need to pay more tax (because I'm spaffing money left right and centre), me on the other hand, I will avoid it any way I can".

I'm using sturgeon as an example, but you could choose any number of them.

 

[Muttley]

Yep it's a massive shift in the ownership breakdown of letting/renting market. Intentional? Who knows?.

Buy to let for amateur landlords was another investment vehicle to make the middle classes feel that little bit richer and that they might just be getting ahead. Of course, it should be all about yield and the capital gains would be a bonus. And no-one could really fail as those capital gains were always happening. I digress.

It's another nail in the coffin of the middle classes and a shift to corporate landlords/super rich just mimicking the big landowners of yesteryear. They won't be squeezed so heavily and we'll have to hope they toe the line on rules and regulations required for safe and acceptable tenanted accommodation.

Theres a whole increasing army of people that now have no option but to rent, that equals an army of 'customers' so they've stepped in.

Great post.

For me, the incentive for spare middle class cash should always be pension. Bricks and mortar have always been a safe bet. We need pensions to be an even safer bet. When Trump and Zelinsky sat together in the White House my property value didn't plummet. My pension did along with everyone else in the country that were lucky enough to have a pension fund.

You never hear of anyone buying government bonds either. That is another interesting area that can make a difference.

What we really need is a sustained period of house prices flatlining or mildly declining. I'm not sure if that is possible.

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

Performance related.
Can you imagine politicians getting performance related.
10 x over budget and six years and counting on two ferries.
Highest drugs deaths in Europe.
Ministerial scandal after scandal.
The list for sturgeon is endless.
For the package mentioned above, not value for money.
But as I said that's not the biggest issue for me, it's the absolute brass necked hypocrisy of it, "we need more tax, you need to pay more tax (because I'm spaffing money left right and centre), me on the other hand, I will avoid it any way I can".

I'm using sturgeon as an example, but you could choose any number of them.

The sturgeons ....take the biscuit: "We are the highest and mightiest bastions of ethics in politics, you need to get rid of rule by nasty corrupt England so give us all your money for my new camper .....I mean ...a new referendum campaign!"

What's that? Oh no don't listen to what Alec tells you about us....he's just bitter and jealous!

*whispers to aide* get some dirt on Alec and if all else fails get a couple of the interns to say he fondled their tits

 

[Muttley]

Performance related.
Can you imagine politicians getting performance related.
10 x over budget and six years and counting on two ferries.
Highest drugs deaths in Europe.
Ministerial scandal after scandal.
The list for sturgeon is endless.
For the package mentioned above, not value for money.
But as I said that's not the biggest issue for me, it's the absolute brass necked hypocrisy of it, "we need more tax, you need to pay more tax (because I'm spaffing money left right and centre), me on the other hand, I will avoid it any way I can".

I'm using sturgeon as an example, but you could choose any number of them.

This is sort of what Cummins was talking about. The devil is in the detail and we now have a generation of politicians who don't like detail. As he said, Whitehall only has about 3 dozen people who will get into that level of detail and are intelligent enough to drive change. The rest, especially the ones in the house of commons, are just mouthpieces. They are just veneer and no substance.

Performance related pay would be amazing but incredibly tough to implement.

 

[Grays_1890]

WOW

https://twitter.com/x/status/1963304165007851745

 

[Grays_1890]

Double wow

https://twitter.com/x/status/1963312297449017503

 

[glasgowspur]

The sturgeons ....take the biscuit: "We are the highest and mightiest bastions of ethics in politics, you need to get rid of rule by nasty corrupt England so give us all your money for my new camper .....I mean ...a new referendum campaign!"

As corrupt as they come, and it was obvious to anyone that wanted to look.
Too many didn’t want to look.
Very much a case of judged on what she said never on her results, which were stupendously bad by just about every metric.

 

[Rorschach]

Performance related.
Can you imagine politicians getting performance related.
10 x over budget and six years and counting on two ferries.
Highest drugs deaths in Europe.
Ministerial scandal after scandal.
The list for sturgeon is endless.
For the package mentioned above, not value for money.
But as I said that's not the biggest issue for me, it's the absolute brass necked hypocrisy of it, "we need more tax, you need to pay more tax (because I'm spaffing money left right and centre), me on the other hand, I will avoid it any way I can".

I'm using sturgeon as an example, but you could choose any number of them.

Whatever the performance indicators are, it should never in a million years be GDP. However, social indicators and other relevant targets, as you have mentioned, would not be the worst idea. It would be relatively simple to come up with a set of metrics against which they are rated, a dashboard for the country so to speak, and if they do not perform then this will also be a factor in their re-election.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I would also say that if you own your own house then you're in good shape. If you want second homes banned and put back in the market place then you should be prepared for your own house value to plummet. That is is the impact of what that supply and demand model would do. It would create mass negative equity in the UK. That's why we're seeing the long game from the different governments.

Thanks that's really interesting.

My goal would be to taper out all private renting, especially the big companies you mention. My method would be through rent caps. This worked very successfully 100 years ago. I agree all house values will drop, but that's what you ultimately want to achieve - to get (first) home ownership back affordable again, back to its traditional 3x annual salary level

Much like Mutley is doing...the mini private landlords have been squeezed out by policy or interest rates. I know 4 people who are selling up personally...so I don't doubt there are thousands doing the same.
But the market isn't crashing from over supply. It's stalling/stagnating for sure. It's probably because the new buyer in the room is corporates. Ideally, as @Gutter Boy suggests prices would fall to fix the affordability rungs at the lower part of the property ladder BUT successive governments have done all they can to prop up and keep rising prices ticking along. And that creates two outcomes...the unaffordability that we see (creating an army of renters, possibly for life). Complete fear of the banks, as at the end of the day, they're the asset holders of all mortgaged property...and a crash would destroy that asset value. (hence the last time the banks fudged up...we (artificially) zero interest rated for years to keep all their commitments above water)

 

[Muttley]

WOW

https://twitter.com/x/status/1963304165007851745

Interesting segway

Jamie Raskin is an American attorney, law professor, and politician.

Done the hard yards, unlike some of our so called politicians. They just thought they could become a politician. I used to rate our politicians for their in depth knowledge of their chosen career. I used to laugh at the Americans for appointing film stars as politicians.

I see the irony in what has just happened to Farage.

 

[glasgowspur]

Whatever the performance indicators are, it should never in a million years be GDP. However, social indicators and other relevant targets, as you have mentioned, would not be the worst idea. It would be relatively simple to come up with a set of metrics against which they are rated, a dashboard for the country so to speak, and if they do not perform then this will also be a factor in their re-election.

It's every politicians play now isn't it, promise the earth, narrow the attainment gap, eradicate child poverty, better health care, never happens.
All they do is move onto another headline grabbing "policy" to distract the masses from the last unfulfilled promise.