nickb1

It (pound sterling) does have an international status that is not related to its current (abysmal) economic "fundamentals": it is one of a basket of currencies in terms of which IMF special drawing rights are denominated. Alongside the Dollar, Euro, Yen and Yuan.

not sure where the figure of 600k extra people per year comes from that is being mentioned here. The ONS figure for net migration seems to be 300k per year with only "experimental estimates" available for 2020-22 and an obvious impact of COVID etc: https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/long-term-international-migration-flows-to-and-from-the-uk/ Net additional dwellings per year are below this but not that much https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/housing-supply-net-additional-dwellings-england-2021-to-2022/housing-supply-net-additional-dwellings-england-2021-to-2022 The first source finds some correlation between net migration and house prices but not statistically robust and not of the magnitude that could explain much of recent house price movements https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-and-housing-in-the-uk/ So in short if we are looking to explain house price "mad gainz", migration is not really where most of the action is, it seems to me, as opposed to credit expansion and speculation.

That's not how it is in the history books. e.g. "the open fields", Orwin and Orwin, writing in the 1930s. The distribution of land seemed to be quite equal, in terms of ordinary peasants having bits of the best, moderate and worst land, the same applied to the Lord. The question of interest was why. If the Lord had all the best land then it would get ploughed first and nobody could get to work on other land until that was done. Hence the authors argue a diffuse distribution of land was down to practical necessity, earlier writers having argued it was an egalitarian system, excepting the fact of feudal service.

good explanation of why you need mix adjustment. But hey, the -0.5% is worrying. Time for government to step in and "support the market" after all, real estate is an "engine of growth", right? Especially in London.

True that. But this explains nothing of price movements or differentials. Or why a few tulips can, briefly, cost more than a house in 17th century Netherlands.

True, it's not a pure ponzi scheme. But how far off? The 17th century Dutch might have said "it's not a ponzi, as there are real tulips that have value".

Great graph. I assume there was some legal fix until the early 1800s?

Really? I thought we (with Chinese assistance) are currently building some e.g. Hinkley Point C.

Not so. Unlike bitcoin or other alternative currencies it's backed by the government's ability to raise taxes in it, because of, ultimately, the state's monopoly on violence (police, army). Which means there is a reliable general demand for it.

not worthless, just declining in value. But you had inflation under the gold standard too, and later when the dollar was convertible.

Industry my ****. Is a flea market an "industry"?

er, because they might learn something socially useful and make a contribution? A mathematically gifted kid might study to be a teacher thereby not improving (probably detrimenting) their 'earnings potential'. Should they get less subsidy than a money grabbing finance student?

Startling as it may seem this is in fact quite unrefuted orthodox economics, for all that the classical economists wanted to avoid this implication of their theories. It's now known as "Georgist" economics, after Henry George, who advocated a 100% land value (actually site value) tax to be levvied on a redistributive basis ie revenues returned to the community.

Quite 🙂

Nope. Rent is exactly that: unearned income. It's a mistake to think of landlords as producing something and a tax as increasing their cost of production.

Finally he has said something half worth listening to. they will have to get rid of him.

So it was known for at least 3 years prior to the current report (probably longer, we are not told when Antino filed his complaint) that this guy was a fraud and nothing was done. No wonder Britain is going down the tubes when we have this kind of accountability at the top of lauded institutions. I don't think it is unrepresentative.

don't care about his personality, politicians are there to have and implement policies.

well the other was implicated by the Iraq war so probably unelectable.

Kinda. The manifesto commitment was to review the case for an LVT. didn't stop the tabloids from running with it though ridiculing "Corbyn's garden tax".

Bit odd to lump Corbyn and Millipede together, Corbyn 1.0 did at least have some radical policies e.g. I recall a LVT which would have helped.

that's the trouble with Prince Andrew, apparently, "too honourable".

You mean ie in favour of Israel and against the Palestinians? nothing that comes out of Keir Starmer's mouth suggests otherwise. Not much does come out of his mouth in terms of policy incidentally, and this is why they wont win the next election. If they don't have policies who cares>? Might as well be one Bozo rather than another.

BUPA and the like are dependent on the NHS. Where do their trained and experienced doctors and nurses come from? Where do they get access to specialised and expensive but rarely used equipment>? etc.

better get your cricket accidents in now then before the new bill takes effect.