Universal Credit

[SirGalahad]

Where did you pull that statistic? Your anus as usual? How can there be a viable statistic for an illegal and therfore covert practice? It's like that ''x % of crimes go unreported every year'' nonsense - how do you fuking know if they go unreported?

I would estimate health tourism is much much higher than 1% based on what I see, waiting rooms crammed full of migrants . Even your own figures ''between 100-300'' so give or take two hundred million, in otherwords no fuking clue.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ngland_-_Exploring_the_Data_-_FULL_REPORT.pdf

If you know how to comprehend data and reports have a go.

I don't think facts will sway a person like yourself who is closed off. What must be it be like to be wrong so often.

 

[Notch7]

So if I type something like: "Red Riding Hood was called that because she wore a red hat.
blah, blah, blah, blah
Red Riding Hood's hat was blue."

The two statements are not inherently contradictory

I said nothing about red or blue hats. I never mentioned hats

land banking is a symptom rather than a cause of the housing crisis. The size of land banks doesnt determine the pace of building.

Some form of building programme is needed to increase house building rate to a much higher level without raising demand leading to higher prices.

Please explain how the above, full sentences are contradictory

Land banking is not 'speculative building'. It is speculatively not building!

I didnt say it was.

It is a contributory factor.

Thats why I said, 'to some extent its true'

What is this speculative pricing model?
I know what a "A Speculative Asset Pricing Model" is but I am not familiar with this Speculative Pricing Model

If I buy some land, I dont know how many houses, liklehood of planning consent, number of units, expensive planning conditions etc. If I then build houses, I dont know how much they will sell for or how quickly. That is why it is a speculative house building model. The difficulty is knowing how much to pay for the land without knowing how much the selling price will be. That is why housebuilding rate is determined by stability of pricing of the second hand market in the locality of a plot of land.

This has nothing to do with land banking.

It is critical to understand why a housebuilder needs to have a pipeline of land to build. It is to do with land banking because it is important to understand why housebuilders need continuity of supply to continue in business. There is a difference between land banking and prudent business management.

 

[SirGalahad]

If I then build houses, I dont know how much they will sell for or how quickly. That is why it is a speculative house building model.

If I build cars, I don't know how much they will sell for ....

Why is the emphasis on speculative? As in investments if its speculative you either have high risk or a real lack of knowledge / information or uncertainty.

 

[Notch7]

You mentioned the rising obesity and aging population which requires more resources to manage - ie demand

The government manages the delivery or supply of public healthcare ie supply side of the issue.

Yes, I know. What I dont understand is why you made the point.

The problems with the NHS are solely with the Government bad policies, be it constant reorganisations, PFI or contracting out

Aging populations are an issue in many countries and healthcare and social care demand is increasing at a rate far outstripping resources and revenue. You are, I presume therefore saying, the demand side has increased massively, but the fault still lies with government bad policies. That may be a convenient argument, but not realistic.

 

[HawkEye244]

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ngland_-_Exploring_the_Data_-_FULL_REPORT.pdf

If you know how to comprehend data and reports have a go.

I don't think facts will sway a person like yourself who is closed off. What must be it be like to be wrong so often.

I'm not reading all that shyte, point me to the page you are basing your assertion

 

[SirGalahad]

Yes, I know. What I dont understand is why you made the point.

Aging populations are an issue in many countries and healthcare and social care demand is increasing at a rate far outstripping resources and revenue. You are, I presume therefore saying, the demand side has increased massively, but the fault still lies with government bad policies. That may be a convenient argument, but not realistic.

Was the ageing population an unanticipated demand shock? Did it just hit us without us knowing? We could and should have planned better for this.
If you want to simplify the issue to points you comprehend then that's your prerogative but the issue with the NHS organisation has been always with the government.

Our GDP per head has increased but we are spending less per head on the NHS. Yeah not realistic.

 

[SirGalahad]

I'm not reading all that shyte, point me to the page you are basing your assertion

No. Don't be scared of reading, it will help you. I hope you continue as the forum jester.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Why do you three (or four now (or three and two halves)) have to be snide all the time.

Argue the points and try to put people right if they are wrong or mistaken.

That is - put them right if they are wrong and mistaken - not just disagreeing with you.

 

[Notch7]

If you want to simplify the issue to points you comprehend then that's your prerogative

You are the one wanting to simplify the point so it agrees with your over simplistic view of supply and demand side.

Its interesting how you often choose to use a sneering air of intellectual superiority in your responses. It speaks volumes about you as a person.

I have to say, you are quite good at it. Sometimes its mildy amusing

Was the ageing population an unanticipated demand shock? Did it just hit us without us knowing? We could and should have planned better for this.
If you want to simplify the issue to points you comprehend then that's your prerogative but the issue with the NHS organisation has been always with the government.

Our GDP per head has increased but we are spending less per head on the NHS. Yeah not realistic.

Very convenient to say an aging population was anticipated, so the government should have planned better. Yes no doubt true, to some extent. Solely the fault of government (which run in 5 year max cycles); no.

What did you say you do for a living?

 

[SirGalahad]

You are the one wanting to simplify the point so it agrees with your over simplistic view of supply and demand side.

Its interesting how you often choose to use a sneering air of intellectual superiority in your responses. It speaks volumes about you as a person.

I have to say, you are quite good at it. Sometimes its mildy amusing



Very convenient to say an aging population was anticipated, so the government should have planned better. Yes no doubt true, to some extent. Solely the fault of government (which run in 5 year max cycles); no.

What did you say you do for a living?

Well I asked you a question about the link between labour and capital which you still haven't responded to.

The only thing that is simplistic is your understanding of economics - it shines through - it's very speculative.

An aging population and rising dependency rates is a fact, it's not true to some extent as truth is something can depend on your experience and perspective.

Parliament may run for fixed terms now but parties tend to win more than one consecutive term -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_general_elections

Looking at that list it seems only time a party has won just a single term in the last 100 years is Ted Heaths conservatives.

 

[vinty]

Have you been claiming social since you left school, while living in your free council house while getting your free prescriptions and teeth polishing, and your kids getting their free meals and school trips, whilst you drive them around in your almost free disability car, with no intention to get a job whilst living the high life and pumping out kids whilst the cash registers go kerr-ching?

What point are you trying to make..

 

[vinty]

Somebody else said:

"sounds like nonsense doesn't it? A script from a political farce. But no, it's actually what's happening. Here's what the Government say:

If you’re paid weekly

If you’re paid weekly by your employer, you will get either 4 or 5 payments of earnings within a Universal Credit assessment period. Depending on the amount you get paid this may affect your Universal Credit.

*When you have 5 weekly earnings payments within an assessment period, your income may be too high to qualify for Universal Credit in that month.

If this happens you will be notified that your income is too high and you will no longer get Universal Credit.*

You can re-apply the following month as you should only get 4 wage payments in your assessment period then.

You will need to be prepared for a month when you get 5 wage payments in one assessment period and budget for a potential change in your monthly Universal Credit payments.

From the document "Guidance: Universal Credit: different earning patterns and your payments (payment cycles)"

www.gov.uk/government/publications/universal-credit-different-earning-patterns-and-your-payments/universal-credit-different-earning-patterns-and-your-payments-payment-cycles#if-youre-paid-weekly

Used to be only the middle class got paid monthly ,the worker got paid weekly because it was just enough to make sure they came back next week ,Horray! even the poor are now middle class.

 

[vinty]

Well I asked you a question about the link between labour and capital which you still haven't responded to.

The only thing that is simplistic is your understanding of economics - it shines through - it's very speculative.

An aging population and rising dependency rates is a fact, it's not true to some extent as truth is something can depend on your experience and perspective.

Parliament may run for fixed terms now but parties tend to win more than one consecutive term -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_general_elections

Looking at that list it seems only time a party has won just a single term in the last 100 years is Ted Heaths conservatives.

Refer to Karl Marx, human labour generates surplus value which is harvested by the Capitalist.

 

[vinty]

Yes, the problems with lack of housing, NHS waiting times, lack of school places, lack of tax revenue for services, less for pensions, and general crap way of life we have now are directly related to the unsustainable migration the UK has been subjected to over the past few years.

Fact.

I agree with your hypothesis that mass immigration is to blame for a lot of our problems, however we have had the Tories in power for a long time and they have done Jack Schitt about it.

 

[Deleted member 63160]

Why do you three (or four now (or three and two halves)) have to be snide all the time.

It's pretty much all they have to feel good about.