An Evening With... Jeremy Corbyn

ruggedtoast

cells wrote: »

can you please look at the link and data rather than blindly going off on one? The stats show that full time male wages are quite uniform across the country varying about 5-10%

Area: Weekly Full time male wage
Birmingham = £592
Manchester = £575
Leeds = £569
Telford = £535
Doncaster = £517
Enfield = £540
Waltham Forest = £574
Hackney = £586


Clearly homes are very affordable for a couple in much of the country. Here is the second biggest city in England

Birmingham average terrace price £143.9k
Birmginham average full time male wage £30,784 and female full time wage £24,596

The stats for Manchester on the link you give are £533 per week not £575. About £28k a year.

Clearly homes are not very affordable or we wouldnt be seeing a demographic crisis of home ownership.

ruggedtoast

cells wrote: »

you definitely dont want that if you think it through
it would result in a flat tax
but clearly you dont really know or think through your views



people arent voting to distribute wealth from the 2/3rds to the bottom 1/6th. Why would they?

The majority dont want it and they vote that way



well you cry with one breath that you want more for the poor and with the second breath you cry that you dont want to give the poor anything. which one is it that you want?

what would be good for the poor is to sell off the council/social homes to them. You dont even need to give them a discount just give them access to a government mortgage at a reasonable rate although I would not object to them receiving a discount

about 5% of the stock should be kept as social as some people have problems that make it difficult if not impossible for them to find private rentals or buy. But some areas are over 50% social homes that clearly crazy

I said they should have the opportunity to make a net contribution.

Though you are correct, neoliberal economic capitalism, your preferred ideology, makes it impossible for society to be anything other than a pyramid of have nots, with a small number of haves grudgingly dropping a few crumbs down to the serfs who toil for them.

[Deleted User]

Couple of quick questions for Rugged. He posts a lot about policies and approaches to fairness, but policies affect individuals. Let's look at a couple of individuals.

My brother and I were brought up by the same parents in the same house. Our parents had the same jobs when he was growing up as they did when I was growing up, so the standard of living was pretty much identical. My father was in education, so we both had the same encouragement to study.

My brother fooled around at school, left with hardly any qualifications, resisted any advice from our parents and from me about getting training and more qualifications, worked as a labourer for a few years, then was a postie, then worked in site security, then aged about 30 decided that he wasn't going to be bossed around, so basically played the system of unemployment benefit and apart from one Christmas as a postie, never worked again. He is now "retired". He has no savings and just his state pension.

I studied reasonably hard at school, obtained a degree, worked part time while I was a student, made good decisions about employment, was willing to move home for better jobs, worked for over 30 years, saved, invested, bought property (just to live in, not "buy to let") and because of my chosen approach to work, money and personal responsibility was able to retire early. Mortgage free, no real debt (Mrs Wild Rover just a zero % car loan). Even able to save a little.

Tell me, Rugged old boy, how much of what I have now do you think ought to be taken from me and given to my brother, and why? I have some (not huge!) savings. What percentage is he entitled to? Do you think that we should both have the same standards of living in retirement, and why?

WR

cells

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Which means that 50% of the working population earn below those levels.

and 50% of terraces cost less than those prices.

The price is still over 4 times an average single persons wage.

£29.9k male wage. £138.8k average terrace. 10% deposit = 4.2 x single income. thats not bad at all

Saving whilst paying rent isn't easy.

this may be true for a lot of people but now that 5% mortgages are availible and reasonable price it means a £138.8k house needs a ~£10k (including solicitors and other fees) to purchase. £10,000 savings isnt too bad or hard a target especially for a person on £29,900 and especially if they are a working couple


also why do you think it is reasonable that single people should be buying and living in homes at an occupancy rate of 1?

ruggedtoast

Wild_Rover wrote: »

Couple of quick questions for Rugged. He posts a lot about policies and approaches to fairness, but policies affect individuals. Let's look at a couple of individuals.

My brother and I were brought up by the same parents in the same house. Our parents had the same jobs when he was growing up as they did when I was growing up, so the standard of living was pretty much identical. My father was in education, so we both had the same encouragement to study.

My brother fooled around at school, left with hardly any qualifications, resisted any advice from our parents and from me about getting training and more qualifications, worked as a labourer for a few years, then was a postie, then worked in site security, then aged about 30 decided that he wasn't going to be bossed around, so basically played the system of unemployment benefit and apart from one Christmas as a postie, never worked again. He is now "retired". He has no savings and just his state pension.

I studied reasonably hard at school, obtained a degree, worked part time while I was a student, made good decisions about employment, was willing to move home for better jobs, worked for over 30 years, saved, invested, bought property (just to live in, not "buy to let") and because of my chosen approach to work, money and personal responsibility was able to retire early. Mortgage free, no real debt (Mrs Wild Rover just a zero % car loan). Even able to save a little.

Tell me, Rugged old boy, how much of what I have now do you think ought to be taken from me and given to my brother, and why? I have some (not huge!) savings. What percentage is he entitled to? Do you think that we should both have the same standards of living in retirement, and why?

WR

Like most of your generation, your brother was fortunate to be born into the beginning of a very long and benign economic cycle which served to provide exponential capital appreciation for whatever assets he did accrue, and an almost unimaginably generous welfare guarantee for ever after, paid for by loans that my generation and the ones below, and beyond will have to find the money for, without receiving those benefits ourselves.

In short. I am not overly impressed by your brother.

If he wants to make amends in some way perhaps he could write to his MP begging for 100,000 affordable homes a year to be built near him, even though that will reduce the value of his main investment, with the same conviction that he almost certainly wrote to try and block them in the past.

Perhaps you could do the same.

cells

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The stats for Manchester on the link you give are £533 per week not £575. About £28k a year.

It is £29.9k for men, £26.2k for women and the average for both sexes is £27.7k (which is where your £28k is from)

Clearly homes are not very affordable or we wouldnt be seeing a demographic crisis of home ownership.

again wrong, clearly homes are VERY affordable in a lot of the country in places like Manchester or Birmingham and far more affordable again in places Like Stoke-on-trent or Darlington or middlesborough etc


The reason home ownership is down is because

1: you are comparing to a period when interest only self cert mortgages were available. If you want to hit the highs of the early 2000s you need a return of self cert and interest only

2: there are good reasons why private renting had to increase and thus ownership decrease. eg more students needing rentals. later marrage, later starting of families, more moving around for work, etc etc


If you still dont believe, have a look at say middlesborough
Average male full time wage = £27,664, female = £23,972 Average terrace £80,000

Is that affordable? £80k? dont lose all credibility by saying that too is unaffordable. So why is ownership down in middlesbrough. well becuase of the reasons i cited, 1 and 2 above.

cells

good luck to you Mr Toast

while you project your imagination onto the world rather than look and learn you will keep scratching your head as to why it is that the country isn't voting for the utopia of hard left politics

setmefree2

cells wrote: »

good luck to you Mr Toast

while you project your imagination onto the world rather than look and learn you will keep scratching your head as to why it is that the country isn't voting for the utopia of hard left politics

As Bill Gates said "Life's not fair. Get used to it." Best thing you can ever say to a working class kid (I was one). Socialism turns the working classes into victims - working class kids needed to be empowered not be given a great big chip on their shoulder (like the one Toast has).

westernpromise

ruggedtoast wrote: »

No, I actually think that everyone should have the opportunity to make enough to make a net contribution.

But you support policies that close those opportunities off. You oppose free schools, you oppose the expansion of grammar schools, you oppose the return of the assisted places scheme that gave bright kids a chance of a better than bog standard education. You oppose university fees even though it was your party that brought them in and even though if they aren't worth it people will stop going and bad universities will close. You oppose people getting the chance to get ahead by buying their council home - you'd rather they rented for ever - and the taxes you'd like to heap onto "the rich" are indiscriminate, hitting anyone who happens to be successful, however that came about.

What you are really after is equality of outcome, so that no matter how hard anyone works they never end up any better off for having done so. You dress it up in a lot of 1970s Marxist pietisms about class and privilege, but it's all just guff to conceal the fact that you are envious of almost everybody and you're trying to dress up a character deficiency as a legitimate political viewpoint.

[Deleted User]

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Like most of your generation, your brother was fortunate to be born into the beginning of a very long and benign economic cycle which served to provide exponential capital appreciation for whatever assets he did accrue, and an almost unimaginably generous welfare guarantee for ever after, paid for by loans that my generation and the ones below, and beyond will have to find the money for, without receiving those benefits ourselves.

In short. I am not overly impressed by your brother.

If he wants to make amends in some way perhaps he could write to his MP begging for 100,000 affordable homes a year to be built near him, even though that will reduce the value of his main investment, with the same conviction that he almost certainly wrote to try and block them in the past.

Perhaps you could do the same.

I'm not impressed by my brother either, nor by your inability to answer straightforward questions. The plain truth is that those who strive, study, work, invest, reinvest and look after their financial prospects will usually resent helping not those who cannot help themselves, but those who sit on their backsides and expect to have everything handed to them on a plate.

As it happens, loads of houses are being built around where I live. As for my brother - the workshy waster I described earlier - I very much doubt if any more houses could be built where he is as he lives in a built up area. You ignore the basic point. My earlier post, while true, is an example of the differences between us. You seem to want to compensate the workshy for being workshy by punishing those who work. Which is why you have no chance. Many labour voters are in the working, striving group, and you and yours have it in for them. :cool:

WR