Forum rules Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.
The market provides an adequate incentive to develop. There is no good reason why if land is worth X undeveloped and X+Y if developed not to do so assuming costs <Y.
It also gives adequate incentive, not to develop yet
if Y increases with time.
Nope,
Because you'll lose the use value of the enhanced asset over that time.
You could retain the asset and sell it later if you think it is going to be worth more later, but you'd still want to develop it immediately and get the higher use value in the interim.
So no, there is no such perverse incentive to wait.
Last edited by SpinningHugo on Thu 28 Sep, 2017 3:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
‘Legal loophole’ stops social homebuilding in Kensington and Chelsea
New research from Shelter reveals that a legal loophole has been used by housing developers to avoid building 706 social homes
The market provides an adequate incentive to develop. There is no good reason why if land is worth X undeveloped and X+Y if developed not to do so assuming costs <Y.
It also gives adequate incentive, not to develop yet
if Y increases with time.
Nope,
Because you'll lose the use value of the enhanced asset over that time.
You could retain the asset and sell it later if you think it is going to be worth more later, but you'd still want to develop it immediately and get the higher use value in the interim.
So no, there is no such perverse incentive to wait.
A building company would presumably, act like you've suggested, but possibly not a speculative investment company.
[T]he European parliament has drawn up a resolution, to be voted on next Tuesday, saying there is clear evidence that EU nationals are being treated unfairly in the UK and that Britons in mainland Europe are also suffering. They report:
“Recent administrative incidents have demonstrated that discrimination against citizens of the EU27 in the United Kingdom and UK citizens in the EU27 is already taking place and is having an impact on the daily lives of the citizens concerned, limiting the effective exercise of their rights,” the document says.
The resolution also attacks the British government’s handling of the Brexit negotiations and claims that for May to live up to her pledge that there will be no physical infrastructure at the Irish border after Brexit, the province of Northern Ireland will have to stay in the customs union.
The European parliament will have the right to veto any agreement between the EU and the UK. Barnier meets its Brexit steering committee almost weekly.
Strong language is used in the nine-page resolution about Britain’s positions, including what it describes as a failure to provide concrete proposals on the financial settlement. The draft resolution says that “so far the absence of any clear proposals has seriously impeded the negotiations”.
(Politics Live, Guardian)
"As somebody who was heavily involved in the pre-1997 Conservative government, so much work was done to get that message across, of the importance of free markets, of sound management of the economy, of global trade. And sadly we do see that that message has been lost," [Theresa May] said.
May said she believed it was down to complacency and a younger disillusioned generation who had grown up post-1997.
“I think in a sense we thought those arguments were done and dusted,” she said. “That everybody understood it. That we didn’t have to go back to them. I think now we see we do have to go back to them. We’ve got to make that case all over again, because there is a generation who have grown up in a different environment and perhaps haven’t seen the problems that can occur when you don’t believe in free markets and sound management of the economy.”
- Tories weren't ready for snap general election, Theresa May says
"As somebody who was heavily involved in the pre-1997 Conservative government, so much work was done to get that message across, of the importance of free markets, of sound management of the economy, of global trade. And sadly we do see that that message has been lost," [Theresa May] said.
May said she believed it was down to complacency and a younger disillusioned generation who had grown up post-1997.
“I think in a sense we thought those arguments were done and dusted,” she said. “That everybody understood it. That we didn’t have to go back to them. I think now we see we do have to go back to them. We’ve got to make that case all over again, because there is a generation who have grown up in a different environment and perhaps haven’t seen the problems that can occur when you don’t believe in free markets and sound management of the economy.”
- Tories weren't ready for snap general election, Theresa May says
5. Permanent residence card
You can currently apply for a permanent residence document if you’ve lived in the UK for 5 years.
You don’t need a permanent residence card to confirm your residence status in the UK unless:
- you’re an extended family member of someone from the European Economic Area or Switzerland and are yourself not an EEA or Swiss national
- you want to apply for British citizenship
- you want to sponsor your partner’s visa application under the Immigration Rules
Your residence card won’t be valid after the UK leaves the EU.
I've stumbled across this posted elsewhere.
I don't know if 'won't be valid after the UK leaves the EU' refers to non-EU nationals already granted permanent residence as well as EU nationals granted the same.
PorFavor wrote:Complacency? What's the average person got to be complacent about? She will, eventually, stray into saying, "You've never had it so good", won't she?
I'll tell you plain, I'm frightened today
I'll put the kettle on
Willow904 wrote:---
Or, you know, after experiencing 7 years of Tory government, maybe the younger generation just decided Tory free market economics are a bit crap.
(cJA edit)
thou hast blasphemed the holy free market, sinner
you'll be corrected
I think we have to show for younger people – and it used to be the case that Conservatives, when they talked about younger people perhaps not supporting the party, they were thinking about students and people under the age of 25. Now it’s under the age of 40 – I think we need to show that we have the policies that will provide for people and will deal with the issues they’re concerned about.
I think we have to show for younger people – and it used to be the case that Conservatives, when they talked about younger people perhaps not supporting the party, they were thinking about students and people under the age of 25. Now it’s under the age of 40 – I think we need to show that we have the policies that will provide for people and will deal with the issues they’re concerned about.
"...I absolutely fundamentally believe that I want this country to be a country where how far you can get on depends on your talents and your willingness to work hard, not where you come from. I think it’s so important that we encourage aspiration, we inspire young people to be their best. For me that’s what Conservatism is about, and it’s about providing an economic environment where people can do that."
"The difference that I always feel between socialism and Conservatism, is that socialists believe in holding people down, and we believe in pulling people up. In helping people to rise up, to achieve their very best. I’ve always believed that Conservatism is about freedom, it’s about individuals being able to make decisions for themselves and their families. That’s why were a low tax party, we want people to be able to keep as much of the money they’ve earned as possible."
To be fair, Lord Howard's questions were good value, too:
Almost every time there is an interview on the mainstream media, on the Today programme or on television, involving a Conservative politician, there are tweets in their multitude denigrating that politician
Oops, guilty
and
You must very often feel like knocking heads together, but you manage to appear serene.
"...I absolutely fundamentally believe that I want this country to be a country where how far you can get on depends on your talents and your willingness to work hard, not where you come from. I think it’s so important that we encourage aspiration, we inspire young people to be their best. For me that’s what Conservatism is about, and it’s about providing an economic environment where people can do that."
I understood May's hard work environment to mean we're all given agricultural labour rotations
show up for two months with something to sleep on
or walk yourself into the sea
tinybgoat wrote:
A building company would presumably, act like you've suggested, but possibly not a speculative investment company.
If someone wishes to behave illogically, and not make money, nothing in law stopping them.
I know a bloke, property developer from That London, who is sitting on a few derelict sites in places like Watford, St Albans & Slough (I think those are correct - all those dreary satellites blur together) and not developing them. The reason? What would generate most profit for him (and his Bahamanian financier) is objected to by the locals. So, he's quite happy to leave them looking like shit, knowing that in a year or so, people would rather see any development rather than an eyesore.
Nothing illogical about that, is there? Not much moral, either. LVT or compulsory purchase would sort it out.
T heresa May’s hasty attempt to refute Jeremy Corbyn’s conference speech shows how far Labour has set her on the back foot. She needs to defend capitalism? Nothing Corbyn or John McDonnell said this week suggested they were about to cast a shroud of Soviet-era command-and-control over the economy, as if queuing for bread and rationed state coupons beckoned. Of course, May couldn’t resist referencing Venezuela. When the old red-scare, demon-eyes tactics re-emerge from Conservative HQ, you know they’re panicking.
Bank of England at risk from populism over economy, says Brown
Former PM says politicians must take joint responsibility with Bank for heading off future financial crises, not rely on experts https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ial-crisis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Gordon Brown has said the Bank of England will be vulnerable to populist demands to “take back control” unless elected politicians accept joint responsibility for heading off future financial crises.
Labour aims to be tenants' champion but cheaper housing will take time
Three-year tenancies may offer more stability but renters can expect to save only a few pounds a week with a rent cap
Labour aims to be tenants' champion but cheaper housing will take time
Three-year tenancies may offer more stability but renters can expect to save only a few pounds a week with a rent cap
The author doesn't say how he came to his conclusions - or, indeed, what "a few pounds a week" might amount to. If we take "a few" to mean a minimum of "three" (pounds a week) that would be billed as a financial bonanza of a monthly saving if it were being floated by the Conservatives!
Last edited by PorFavor on Thu 28 Sep, 2017 7:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bank of England at risk from populism over economy, says Brown
Former PM says politicians must take joint responsibility with Bank for heading off future financial crises, not rely on experts https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ial-crisis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Gordon Brown has said the Bank of England will be vulnerable to populist demands to “take back control” unless elected politicians accept joint responsibility for heading off future financial crises.
HSOM?
Good evening
The word 'populist' seems to be completely unnecessary here - I haven't heard too many demands for the BoE to come back under Government control but he also has pointed out some of the weaknesses in how it acts
Oversight is necessary, however, and I was never a fan of Mervyn King
Bank of England at risk from populism over economy, says Brown
Former PM says politicians must take joint responsibility with Bank for heading off future financial crises, not rely on experts https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ial-crisis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Gordon Brown has said the Bank of England will be vulnerable to populist demands to “take back control” unless elected politicians accept joint responsibility for heading off future financial crises.
HSOM?
Good evening
The word 'populist' seems to be completely unnecessary here - I haven't heard too many demands for the BoE to come back under Government control but he also has pointed out some of the weaknesses in how it acts
Oversight is necessary, however, and I was never a fan of Mervyn King
John McDonnell has long argued in favour of ending BofE independence, he did so as recently as 2015. Of course, in his current role he cannot.
The BoE didn't exactly cover itself in glory during the financial crisis and Mervyn King was not a good advert for it
Challenging and reviewing whether it has been a success or not is something that should be carried out periodically and reviewing the decision whether to maintain the separation as is should be part of that - not to do so would be negligent
