fluffy666

Try the link I posted earlier about sea level rise maps.. then put it to +7 meters and look at what happens to China. Oops. Do we really need Shanghai?

I was thinking more infrastructure - Some of our main railway routes are well over 100 years old, and even things like motorways and airports should be expected to be around for over 100+ years. Which is interesting for the idea of a Boris Island airport. As far as flood plains go.. It should be far more explicit. As in 'This new development expects to be flooded out every 20 years, and more often under most global warming scenarios'. That would focus minds.

That's a very, very broad definition of 'Half'. I'd prefer 'A third at best'. My position is that the continual barrage of claims that the public sector is stuffed full of highly-paid people doing non-jobs who could be sacked tomorrow with no effects is basically made-up. And the claim that the public sector suddenly had a massive expansion under Labour (Including bank bailouts is just daft). As above, public sector employment was at a low ebb in 2000 and at peak it was below the levels seen under Ms T. To me, it's just the lazy repetition of propaganda.

The whole idea of LLCs, as well as bankruptcy laws and a basic welfare state is that it frees people to go out and innovate, create businesses and the like without the fear that if anything goes wrong, they'll be on the street. Indeed, it's cited as a reason why small business formation rates are lower in the US - quit your job, lose medical coverage. The real problem is the misuse of LLCs to extract cash and go bankrupt deliberately, and of course banks recklessly lending for house purchase.

The Thwaites glacier on it's own is 60cm, the rest of the ice sheet adds the rest. The WAIS has collapsed previously with little apparent provocation.

I had an altercation a few years ago when some shoes fell apart (soles broke up) within a few weeks of ownership. Took them back, was accused of 'misusing' them and eventually, and grudgingly given a refund. Given that, as an Englishman I hate complaining, this was traumatic. Never again..

Well, let's put it like this.. It's been confirmed that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has been destabilized , which means we are committed to at least 6 meters of sea level rise. We are seeing significant increases in floods through extreme events and droughts. And things are not going to get better.. The timeline is currently uncertain, but we could easily see a large chunk of that during this century. Basically, building any new infrastructure within 10 meters of sea level should be banned. Building houses on flood plains - without putting them on stilts or taking other anti-flood measures - should be banned. You can see how it may affect you (or at least your descendants) by looking here: http://flood.firetree.net/ I'm interested to see how they are planning to deal with the Wash expanding as far as Cambridge. Or why we are even thinking of spending money on the Somerset Levels.

This is probably the most shocking thing.. If I had a 'portfolio' of 1000 houses, you'd want to manage it as a business - you'd have full-time people for repairs, maintenance and cleaning, compliance, answering the phone.. Put the debt on a commercial footing and make it a limited company so that you are not on the hook for millions if it all goes FUBAR. But I suppose they know better.

But he is a Man of Austerity and Seriousness and Stuff and so won't even think of going on an unfunded pre-election splurge.

No, planning departments are required. Planning law is stupid in this country.

You want to abolish planning departments entirely? OK with that industrial scale pig farm being built next door right up to the boundary? And if not then some of those people, at least, are not doing 'non-jobs'. Numbers are handy. Without them you are just repeating propaganda. If I wrote a post saying 'Here's a couple of examples of house prices going up, therefore all house prices always go up, QED' would you accept that? I work in the private sector, to the extent that I'm probably a net contributor of tax even with kids in school. But there you go.

That's a very scary chart for anyone who is a FTB in their mid-30s onwards. Or anyone who has an IO mortgage. I strongly suspect that drop at the end is the classic 'Had the same job for 20 years, just got downsized and have a permanent wage cut' cliff. Part of my 'plan' (such that it is) is to make sure I have the house paid off by my early 50s as well as a decent pension fund, because I can see this happening to me. Which means staying lucky for at least another decade..

Not really, I'd hope for GDP to rise at c. 3% a year.

Except that the jump to 2010 includes the banks. Apples and oranges, and it's not like there isn't a helpful arrow pointing it out. If you find more historical data, you also find that public sector employment was at a low point in 2000. Especially with per-capita adjustment, we are still nowhere near the levels attained by that noted communitarian, Thatcher.. http://www.tutor2u.net/blog/index.php/economics/comments/cities-dependent-on-the-public-sector

Blair was left wing? Hmmm.. yes, that campaign of renationalisation, taxing the rich, regulating capital and building social goods gave it away, didn't it? As for the rest of your comment, this is exactly the point I am making. Vague arm waving about 'public sector non-jobs' without any numbers. Sorry, doesn't cut it.

2000 = 5.5 million 2005 = 6.1 million. That is an increase - perhaps 2% a year, although less on a per-capita basis because population has gone up quite a bit over the lifetime of that graph. Always check where the zero axis is..

Ignoring, of course, the huge issue of tax evasion/avoidance on top of the general tax giveaways to the wealthy. Funny enough, that's not the allowed narrative for the right-wingers of the world. Most of whom seem convinced that government could be slashed tomorrow (and this slashing would have zero knock on effects), but are utterly incapable of identifying serious targets for this slashing. It's classic 'Overton window' stuff. We cannot discuss tax rises for the rich. We cannot discuss actual stimulus programs (apart from 'give cheap money to banks', which really dosen't seem to work). We cannot discuss multinationals avoiding tax. All we are allowed to talk about is just how nasty we can get towards mid-to-lower band public sector workers and the unemployed. Well, we've been punching them for the last few years and the deficit is still sky high. Obviously not punching enough.

Indeed, a China collapse would be about as white as white swans go.. everyone and their kid sister has been predicting it for most of the last decade. Could be something more like a major el Nino event that knocks harvests worldwide by 30+%. Or the long threatened Saudi Arabian coup.. Or a sudden and unexpected bankruptcy in the shale oil/gas sector..

Direct quote: I think that if you are expected to work to 70,you should reap some blummin benefits ! It's a grim enough prospect, as it is ! No...borrowing even more money is not a benefit..

That depends if the lender is willing to take IO payments. Sounds like the lender in question wasn't.

That looks hideous to live in..

Bring a brush for the chalk outlines. Even that place is the kind of house that not that long ago would have gone for a near-nominal sum because you'd need either a lot of time or a lot of money to make it properly liveable.

Sad thing is, this is the cheapest property in the town.

Not too far from where I live: http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-29429883.html Don't get lost in the floorplan.

You see, in theory the march of technology displacing jobs should mean: - Longer education before going into the workforce - Shorter working hours - Earlier retirement. So more students should be fine, without student loans. The fact that if anything these trends are going backwards - and we are apparently setting records for the number of people in employment - suggests that something is very, very f***ed up with economics nowadays..