Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Dyson Fury

Allister Heath : "House prices are totally out of control"

Recommended Posts

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/03/17/housing-decline-mobility/

(premium paywall unfortunately)

(the online headline is less dramatic than the one in the print edition)

I don't think I've ever seen such opinion from Allister Heath before.  The usual swipe at excessive stamp duty limiting transactions and mobility, but then a strong tirade against HPI.  "How can such poor and declining affordability possibly be sustainable or sensible?"   And makes the point that the older generation OOs don't benefit from their HPI gainz anywhere near as much as they think, because "parents and grandparents end up transferring all their property gains to their children to allow them to get on the property ladder". 

Remarkable to see him writing such opinion, and in the BTLegraph of all places.  Is mainstream opinion turning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Quote

Housing and the decline of mobility

Interesting headline to the article as when the idea of BtL was first being touted in the press and other media in the 1980s and 1990s the idea was that it would enable more mobility of labour through easier access to tenancies wherever the work was.  People then couldn't find decent accommodation if they had to work away from home which stifled mobility and the labour market.

They were typically ending up in site hut accommodation a bit like Auf Wiedersehen Pet in Germany - naturally people weren't that keen on that or at least not in large numbers or unless they were desperate or exceptionally aspiring etc etc

It was touted that easy mobility was needed for the "Enterprise Economy" - the enterprise economy that's turned out to be nearer the nail bar, tax credits and benefits economy.

So nothing worked out the way it was originally touted way back then, in fact something far far worse actually emerged - what a surprise.  

No doubt they'll have some new ideas now about how to increase mobility - the best advice this time is to take everything they say on the subject with a large pinch of salt - or in other words just don't believe them on that.  But if they're touting lower house prices then that does make good sense.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dyson Fury said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/03/17/housing-decline-mobility/

(premium paywall unfortunately)

(the online headline is less dramatic than the one in the print edition)

I don't think I've ever seen such opinion from Allister Heath before.  The usual swipe at excessive stamp duty limiting transactions and mobility, but then a strong tirade against HPI.  "How can such poor and declining affordability possibly be sustainable or sensible?"   And makes the point that the older generation OOs don't benefit from their HPI gainz anywhere near as much as they think, because "parents and grandparents end up transferring all their property gains to their children to allow them to get on the property ladder". 

Remarkable to see him writing such opinion, and in the BTLegraph of all places.  Is mainstream opinion turning?

The fookin' penny drops . It s a ponzi where the bank ends up with everything because all the gainz are revolved into deposits for ever increasing mortgage debts.

I really do think people are starting to see the truth of all this, or maybe they saw it all along but were playing the game because that's what everyone else did.

If they are allowing this to be printed in the Torygraph I think the government might have had enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wsn03 said:

The tide really is turning

That's an 8 year+ year old HPC point of view (for such articles) and with oxygen tanks depleted, I'm holding my breath, deep under the water, on the renting side, against rages of HPI++++ and HPI celebration, that the bankers alone are not just responsible for.

Stamp duty = ace from my POV.   Limits how much buyers can pay the HPIers.  Got to find the money yourself, not borrow it.

SDLT surcharge on 2nd homes/BTL = ace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ubuntu said:

wasn't this guy a bankster's shill when at City AM? 

He was always pretty bearish on housing when at City AM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ubuntu said:

wasn't this guy a bankster's shill when at City AM? 

He did a complete intellectual 180 in the years after the 2008 crash. He started off as a hardcore Austrian wanting governments to step back and let market forces sort out the mess, but as the years went by he became more and more enamoured of government and central bank intervention to prop up asset prices, look after the rentiers and protect the UK's glorious financial sector. His position at the Telegraph was his reward for finally siding with the Establishment.

Edited by Dorkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The government is facing a funding shortfall, and two generations have received eye watering amounts of free money via housing equity. 

It's safe to presume these beneficiaries will be hit by some kind of tax which spills over into house pricing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PopGun said:

The government is facing a funding shortfall, and two generations have received eye watering amounts of free money via housing equity. 

It's safe to presume these beneficiaries will be hit by some kind of tax which spills over into house pricing.

they are taxed at 40% on death already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

House prices were out of control in 2004.  Now the entire economy is broken -- it'll take far more than a crash in house prices to sort it out.

IMO a HPC would only make matters worse, as all the wealthy would swoop in and buy up all the housing stock -- what needs to happen is for all the unearned wealth (in the UK and around the world) to be destroyed, while earned income is supported.  I'm not sure how this will happen*, but it will eventually happen.  

[*war is one way.  I'd prefer it not to be that.]

Edited by dgul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Oh Well :( said:

they are taxed at 40% on death already.

40% over a pretty generous threshold, and one which is getting bigger all the time...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, dgul said:

House prices were out of control in 2004.  Now the entire economy is broken -- it'll take far more than a crash in house prices to sort it out.

IMO a HPC would only make matters worse, as all the wealthy would swoop in and buy up all the housing stock -- what needs to happen is for all the unearned wealth (in the UK and around the world) to be destroyed, while earned income is supported.  I'm not sure how this will happen*, but it will eventually happen.  

[*war is one way.  I'd prefer it not to be that.]

 

Worse lol.  Let's find out.  It can't be much worse than now from my renter perspective!  HPC to make things worse?  What you're setting out is that there can be no HPC because too much wealth out there?

That's one reason the HPIers been paying ever higher prices.    

ITV Tonight (2006) had identical twin BTLers saying exactly the same.   That someone would always step in if prices fell.   Then came 2007-08.   Taken zirp, QE galore, to make renters continue to suffer their HPIers and protect their positions... but now banks in stronger position.  Houses run on money.

All the wealthy people?  Many of them have been long-wave HPIers who have already danced into BTL.  HPC to find out malinvested positions and bring on some cascade.   And also a fright to stay out of property investment.  HPC.  What have we been doing apart from watch the speculators get richer-and-richer, by paying ever higher prices, with asset values ballooning.   Much of that 'wealth' can disappear on the house price side of things.  HPC. 

Use of Weapons (quote)

'But we believe the Imperial Army has great reserves of fuel,' Napoerea said, looking very unhappy.

'Even if they have,' he told the high-priest, 'Commanders will move more cautiously knowing supplies have been interrupted; they're careful guys.  But I bet they never did have the supplies you thought; they probably think you have bigger supplies than you do, and with the advance they've had to fund recently... believe me; they may panic a little if the refinery raid comes off the way I hope it will.'
-----

'Gents, we are not in disarray! We are falling back. But they are in much worse shape than we are, taking far heavier casualties; each metre is costing them blood. And, all the time, their supply lines get longer. We must take them to the point where they start to think about pulling back, then present them with the possibility - the seeming possibility - of a knock-out blow.  But it won't knock us out; it knocks them out.'  He looked round them.  'Believe me; it'll work. You may have to leave the citadel for a while, but when you return, I guarantee it will be in triumph.'

-----

It took a few days, while the Imperial Army struggled up the valleys, and the Hegemonarchy's forces resisted, retreated, resisted, retreated, but eventually - watching for signs that the Imperial soldiers were tiring, and the tanks and trucks not always moving when they might have wanted to, starved of fuel - he decided that were he on the other side, he'd be thinking about halting the advance.

...The priests looked at the territory they had lost, and the fraction they had left, and thought it was all over for them. He looked at his relatively unscathed divisions, his fresh units, his crack squads, all positioned just where they should be, knives laid against and inside the body of an overextended, worn-out enemy, just ready to cut... and thought it was all over for the Empire.

...He waited until a couple of divisions had made it through the pass, then had the units that had held it - and mostly retreated into the forests around the pass, not gone down the pass at all - take it again.  The counter-attack finally began. He started with the elite troops, then brought in the rest. The Air Force still concentrated on the supply lines for the first couple of days, then switched to the front line. The Imperial Army wavered, line crinkling; it seemed to hesitate like some wash of water almost but not quite capable of overspilling the damming line of mountains save in one place (and that trickle was drying, still pushing for the city, leaving the pass, fighting through the forests and fields for the shining goal they still hoped might win the war...), then the line fell back; the soldiers too exhausted, their supplies of ammunition and fuel too sporadic.

The passes stayed with the Hegemonarchy, and slowly they pushed down from them again, so that it must have seemed to the Imperial soldiers that they were forever shooting up-hill, and that while advancing had been a heavy, dangerous slog, retreating was only too easy.   The retreat became a rout in valley after valley. He insisted on keeping the counter-attack going; the priests cabled that more forces ought to be deployed to stop the advance of the two Imperial divisions on the capital.   He ignored them. There was barely enough left of the two tattered divisions to make one whole one, and they were being gradually eroded further all the time. It was possible they might make it to the city, but after that they would have nowhere to go. He thought it might be satisfying to accept their eventual surrender personally.

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

House prices are not out of control. House prices are harmless; dont matter one way or another.

Its the debt borrowed for house that fcks the economy up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Venger said:

ITV Tonight (2006) had identical twin BTLers saying exactly the same.   That someone would always step in if prices fell.   Then came 2007-08.   Taken zirp, QE galore, to make renters continue to suffer their HPIers and protect their positions... but now banks in stronger position.  Houses run on money.

All the wealthy people?  Many of them have been long-wave HPIers who have already danced into BTL.  HPC to find out malinvested positions and bring on some cascade.   And also a fright to stay out of property investment.  HPC.  What have we been doing apart from watch the speculators get richer-and-richer, by paying ever higher prices, with asset values ballooning.   Much of that 'wealth' can disappear on the house price side of things.  HPC.

I hope you are right. I guess it's one way of telling how much cash is really out there and how much is just bubble.

One thing of concern is that land / housing is not a choice for humans, and without it we would drown / freeze to death. The demand from this captive market being monopolized (particularly at the bottom end) was surely a large factor behind HPI. That may still be a factor to speculators.

To me it's a bit like drinkable water, without it a person will die. Nobody invented or created water, nobody owns the rights to water. When you receive water you are paying for the maintenance and distribution of it. Same with food, you are paying for the growing, distribution, labor etc. Tesco's can't tell Sainsburies to stop selling apples. If a corporation wanted to buy / own the rights to water and charge a levy for the fact they simply own it, this would bring out the "socialist" in everyone including Landlords.

Nobody invented or created land. Unlike water (relatively), being of limited supply causes the need to designate chunks of it between humans, be that for free on social agreement or for payment. Ending up being engineered into feudalism is where it went wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dgul said:

IMO a HPC would only make matters worse, as all the wealthy would swoop in and buy up all the housing stock

No they wont because the speculators will be the first to be wiped out. Anyway I dont give a toss, bring it on and I'll take my chances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your post reminded me of Churchill's speech Arpeggio.

And as for cash out there vs bubble, also reminded of Pretcher.   It's impossible to tell for certain but I am betting against a view of vast sums of money waiting to protect HPI.   I know the BTLers have their debts too, having doubled down.   If there was so much wealth, why the BTL debt?    Values are found at the margin.   Hello S24.

If prices slide, then surely it won't take too much to change sentiment from these high levels, and begin finding out those who have doubled down into it at the highest prices (especially BTLers).  It's difficult to tell, but I am not going to hold to that much wealth on the side of general population... and believe those who are BTL minded having just about already entered the market.   Unless things are crazy, I have to hope a corporate (sat on money) to rent out, or foreign money, is not going to be interested in buying a south Manchester/Cheshire semi-detached, if market turns from here, when prices already ballooned, or into any price falls.   

A market can't really crash until it has sucked in just about all those who will buy.

Quote

 

When the volume of credit is large, investors can perceive vast sums of money and value where in fact there are only repayment contracts, which are financial assets dependent upon consensus valuation and the ability of debtors to pay.   [............]The dynamics of value expansion and contraction explain why a bear market can bankrupt millions of people.

http://www.bullnotbull.com/archive/primary-precondition-deflation.html

 

 

Quote

 

Winston Churchill
Speech made to the House of Commons
on May 4, 1909. 

PDF: http://www.grundskyld.dk/pdf/Winston-Churchill-Land-Monopoly.pdf

...[snip]Roads are made, streets are made, services are improved, electric
light turns night into day, water is brought from reservoirs a hundred
miles off in the mountains -- and all the while the landlord sits still.

Every one of those improvements is effected by the labor and cost of
other people and the taxpayers. To not one of those improvements
does the land monopolist, as a land monopolist, contribute, and yet
by every one of them the value of his land is enhanced. He renders
no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general
welfare, he contributes nothing to the process from which his own
enrichment is derived.
[/snip]

 

 

On 9/7/2015 at 6:52 PM, Neverwhere said:

...Homeownerism is the natural state, the thing which we evolved to do - shelter ourselves and our families. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that impulses.

Landlordism, on the other hand, causes insecurity of shelter and all of the associated social ills that go with that and effectively imposes a greater burden of taxation on renters than on any other sector of society as their taxes effectively compensate for land rights and yet they have no free access to land and must pay for a second time in order to shelter themselves.

Everyone should have the opportunity to have security of shelter and the best way to achieve that would be through compensated property rights, a removal of all taxes on income and productivity, and widespread homeownership. Maybe those first two are pipe dreams but they are worth arguing for, and in the meantime we can at least practically shoot for the last one: housepricecrash!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Venger said:

 

Worse lol.  Let's find out.  It can't be much worse than now from my renter perspective!  HPC to make things worse?  What you're setting out is that there can be no HPC because too much wealth out there?

That's one reason the HPIers been paying ever higher prices.    

ITV Tonight (2006) had identical twin BTLers saying exactly the same.   That someone would always step in if prices fell.   Then came 2007-08.   Taken zirp, QE galore, to make renters continue to suffer their HPIers and protect their positions... but now banks in stronger position.  Houses run on money.

All the wealthy people?  Many of them have been long-wave HPIers who have already danced into BTL.  HPC to find out malinvested positions and bring on some cascade.   And also a fright to stay out of property investment.  HPC.  What have we been doing apart from watch the speculators get richer-and-richer, by paying ever higher prices, with asset values ballooning.   Much of that 'wealth' can disappear on the house price side of things.  HPC. 

Use of Weapons (quote)

 

  Reveal hidden contents

'But we believe the Imperial Army has great reserves of fuel,' Napoerea said, looking very unhappy.

'Even if they have,' he told the high-priest, 'Commanders will move more cautiously knowing supplies have been interrupted; they're careful guys.  But I bet they never did have the supplies you thought; they probably think you have bigger supplies than you do, and with the advance they've had to fund recently... believe me; they may panic a little if the refinery raid comes off the way I hope it will.'
-----

'Gents, we are not in disarray! We are falling back. But they are in much worse shape than we are, taking far heavier casualties; each metre is costing them blood. And, all the time, their supply lines get longer. We must take them to the point where they start to think about pulling back, then present them with the possibility - the seeming possibility - of a knock-out blow.  But it won't knock us out; it knocks them out.'  He looked round them.  'Believe me; it'll work. You may have to leave the citadel for a while, but when you return, I guarantee it will be in triumph.'

-----

It took a few days, while the Imperial Army struggled up the valleys, and the Hegemonarchy's forces resisted, retreated, resisted, retreated, but eventually - watching for signs that the Imperial soldiers were tiring, and the tanks and trucks not always moving when they might have wanted to, starved of fuel - he decided that were he on the other side, he'd be thinking about halting the advance.

...The priests looked at the territory they had lost, and the fraction they had left, and thought it was all over for them. He looked at his relatively unscathed divisions, his fresh units, his crack squads, all positioned just where they should be, knives laid against and inside the body of an overextended, worn-out enemy, just ready to cut... and thought it was all over for the Empire.

...He waited until a couple of divisions had made it through the pass, then had the units that had held it - and mostly retreated into the forests around the pass, not gone down the pass at all - take it again.  The counter-attack finally began. He started with the elite troops, then brought in the rest. The Air Force still concentrated on the supply lines for the first couple of days, then switched to the front line. The Imperial Army wavered, line crinkling; it seemed to hesitate like some wash of water almost but not quite capable of overspilling the damming line of mountains save in one place (and that trickle was drying, still pushing for the city, leaving the pass, fighting through the forests and fields for the shining goal they still hoped might win the war...), then the line fell back; the soldiers too exhausted, their supplies of ammunition and fuel too sporadic.

The passes stayed with the Hegemonarchy, and slowly they pushed down from them again, so that it must have seemed to the Imperial soldiers that they were forever shooting up-hill, and that while advancing had been a heavy, dangerous slog, retreating was only too easy.   The retreat became a rout in valley after valley. He insisted on keeping the counter-attack going; the priests cabled that more forces ought to be deployed to stop the advance of the two Imperial divisions on the capital.   He ignored them. There was barely enough left of the two tattered divisions to make one whole one, and they were being gradually eroded further all the time. It was possible they might make it to the city, but after that they would have nowhere to go. He thought it might be satisfying to accept their eventual surrender personally.

 

Might be.  I don't know.

I've spoken of my thesis before -- that they've created a sh1tload of money and much of it is in the hands of the wealthy -- note, not the overleveraged speculators, but the otherwise wealthy. It is nice to think that they're all into BTL, but there is a tidal wave of wealth out there beyond that.   I find the wealth out there to be quite scary now -- unearned wealth is now a much more significant force that earned wealth.  

The next financial crisis will (IMO) be the decimation of unearned wealth (just because it can't continue like this -- wealth doesn't work that way in the long term, although that is in itself a point for discussion), but that won't occur simply as the result of house prices crashing, because it doesn't actually have the impact of destroying much unearned wealth.  The most direct way to impact unearned wealth is through inflation, and I see a long period of increasing inflation*, with interest rates always lagging.  I don't like this, but I like the alternatives less.

[*and house prices inflating but not matching general inflation -- so slowly depreciating in real terms]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dgul said:

Might be.  I don't know.

I've spoken of my thesis before -- that they've created a sh1tload of money and much of it is in the hands of the wealthy -- note, not the overleveraged speculators, but the otherwise wealthy. It is nice to think that they're all into BTL, but there is a tidal wave of wealth out there beyond that.   I find the wealth out there to be quite scary now -- unearned wealth is now a much more significant force that earned wealth.  

The next financial crisis will (IMO) be the decimation of unearned wealth (just because it can't continue like this -- wealth doesn't work that way in the long term, although that is in itself a point for discussion), but that won't occur simply as the result of house prices crashing, because it doesn't actually have the impact of destroying much unearned wealth.  The most direct way to impact unearned wealth is through inflation, and I see a long period of increasing inflation*, with interest rates always lagging.  I don't like this, but I like the alternatives less.

[*and house prices inflating but not matching general inflation -- so slowly depreciating in real terms]

Maybe so. 

A HPC doesn't destroy that much unearned wealth?

I hope we don't get your inflation.  It may do that, but it would only make my own position worse.  Although any inflation, against little wage growth, should mean less money for the BTLers.  The rent comes after being able to feed ones family, and get to work.   I limit my spending.  I prefer HPC.

The properly rich (with money, not just equity, which is subject to valuation change) are not going to buy up every such house on market; they lust for having cash in bank and elsewhere than in property, imo.  

And there is strain / political change in play.  S24 perhaps some early manifestation of that.   Oh for a tilt toward homeownership, and there could be big VI in getting lending to homeownership (allowing boomers to take some equity falls and bringing BTLers down).    

In the Times a couple of weeks ago, an article claimed UK companies (listed?) sat on £1 Trillion of cash, but not putting it to work.   The suggestion was so much doubt about the economy.  My view is rentierism is one reason why.   Homeownership levels so down, and values so high, things stutter.  I know I do my best to limit spending with any company that has any interest in HPI, and also other companies are not getting my spending because I do not own my own home.

 

Quote

 

A New York University prof, Edward Wolff, has done some interesting research for us. He found rich people (the top 1%) have just 9% of their net worth in their houses, while middle-class Americans have 63% there.

.....In fact, rich people have 47% of their net worth in business assets and another 30% in financial stuff. They are as massively diversified as the average schmuck is not. Not surprisingly, the rich are getting a lot richer lately. The rest of us, not so much. Just more indebted.

So when this one asset that most people have hitched their star to falters, the consequences can be extreme. 

more at source (Canada Housing blog) source December 2014: http://www.greaterfool.ca/2014/12/28/think-rich/ 

 

 

Quote

 

2013:  A new survey of family offices by Citi finds that the wealthy are cash heavy—meaning they may fall short of the investment returns they're expecting. Wealthy families have about 39 percent of their assets in cash, according to a recent poll of more than 50 large family office representatives from 20 countries conducted by Citi Private Bank.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/rich-families-hoarding-cash-citi-140309151.html

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Venger said:

Maybe so. 

A HPC doesn't destroy that much unearned wealth?

I hope we don't get your inflation.  It may do that, but it would only make my own position worse.  Although any inflation, against little wage growth, should mean less money for the BTLers.  The rent comes after being able to feed ones family, and get to work.   I limit my spending.  I prefer HPC.

The properly rich (with money, not just equity, which is subject to valuation change) are not going to buy up every such house on market; they lust for having cash in bank and elsewhere than in property, imo.  

And there is strain / political change in play.  S24 perhaps some early manifestation of that.   Oh for a tilt toward homeownership, and there could be big VI in getting lending to homeownership (allowing boomers to take some equity falls and bringing BTLers down).    

In the Times a couple of weeks ago, an article claimed UK companies (listed?) sat on £1 Trillion of cash, but not putting it to work.   The suggestion was so much doubt about the economy.  My view is rentierism is one reason why.   Homeownership levels so down, and values so high, things stutter.  I know I do my best to limit spending with any company that has any interest in HPI, and also other companies are not getting my spending because I do not own my own home.

Well, none of use know what the future will bring.

Me, I assume that the UK moves to a institutional landlord system, with changes to the law to enable security of tenure.  

This isn't what I want, but how I see TPTB getting themselves out of the mess they've got themselves into.  I see them introducing all sorts of props to help this happen without a crash in prices -- miras to support current owners (=prices) and tax breaks to support the institutional investors.

(of course I'm probably wrong -- usually am...)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly a few HPCers (not you) seem to even welcome that outcome (institutional landlord system & better security of tenure).

It's just the same old shit-runs-down, money runs up, for me.

And makes me less inclined to put into the system (which I assume would be similar for younger people coming through) when it is so much harder to get some position for your work.  

As in your brilliant post about business and productivity vs HPI.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our best bet is a currency crisis from somewhere, rate rises and selling of leveraged debt. Stability and low irs is the enemy of the hpc. Pain on mortgage paymnents. Without that there is no chance of hpc. Perhaps here is more chance of war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Venger said:

Sadly a few HPCers (not you) seem to even welcome that outcome (institutional landlord system & better security of tenure).

It's just the same old shit-runs-down, money runs up, for me.

And makes me less inclined to put into the system (which I assume would be similar for younger people coming through) when it is so much harder to get some position for your work.  

As in your brilliant post about business and productivity vs HPI.  

 

I hate what they've done to the UK economy.  They've decimated the incentives to actually invest in the economy, in employment, in having a place in the future.  Instead we've got government employment (and some other similar jobs, like railways), a benefits culture and the finsec in London providing the illusion of GDP, but actually only driving the inequality ever deeper.  And they don't seem to want to solve it, to make the majority in the UK have a stake in a vibrant and healthy economic future.  Instead they seem to want to have a sort of feudal rentier system, with everyone just buying imported sh1t because everyone else does.  It is my opinion that this state can't actually be maintained for that long, because eventually the currency collapses because there isn't anything in the UK to invest in anymore...  but it'll be a long slog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   94 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.