Forum Topic

Is the recession over?

After the years of this awful financial downturn over yet?  Are the green leaves of recovery at last here to cheer us?

Gerry Tan ● 4688d73 Comments

To my mind, they supported the customers. If Lloyds and RBS had collapsed, millions of people would suddenly have found themselves without a functioning current account, with chaotic results.

Susan Kelly ● 4679d

Your govt supported the Banks not The Bankers. Anyway those people work bloody hard for their graft. Start at sixty hours a week then more like seventy to eighty for senior managers and anyway being salaried they pay fifty percent  income tax on every pound earned unlike the very rich who this government like successive ones before them allow to pay no or virtually no tax T all!  Would you lHave liked to see the Banks go down. Would you have like the UK to  be in the same position as Spain or Greece? Like it or not Banking is the life line of London

Edward Rountree ● 4679d

They tend to only be in the really big apartments. They now have housekeepers who go from place to place looking after a dozen or so places but generaly having living quarters in one place or now just using contract companies.It's very common in central London but it seems that some 400 flats in Brentford are amongst the list Simon Hughes has and it is the same in other western boroughs.I've asked for a complete breakdown.... of the details!!

Michael Brandt ● 4680d

No. There is a lot of playing with the figures.

Philippa Bond ● 4680d

Aren't they live-in housekeepers?

Philippa Bond ● 4680d

That would be better and that it has to be occupied by UK citizens or residents who are here full time and pay their tax and national insurance here.Of course that may bring house prices down and there are far too many on the gravy train to ever allow that to happen.

Michael Brandt ● 4682d

So they have just been built to make the rich richer,not to house people...sad. Maybe a law should be made that a property can't be bought and be left empty.

Keith Iddon ● 4682d

Most of these overseas investors do not actually rent out the properties. Or use it for family who are passing through Generally, they leave them empty, and just have a property maintenance contract or a housekeeper and pay the council tax. It's a very cheap option on their investment.I suspect that councils know this and are happy as they get council tax revenue and do not have to provide any services.Indicative of this is Brentford where not one extra school has been provided or any other facilities cone to that.It the places were fully occupied then the local facilities would be past breaking point and the town bustling.

Michael Brandt ● 4682d

A simpler solution is to make it illegal for individuals to own more than one home. You only need one home after all. Landlord organisations would be licensed and control of which companies and what sorts of companies could be landlords would be tight. It's not all that long ago that 70% of all rented property was owned by the State.There is also talk of restricting house purchase to those who live in the UK and who have lived here for quite a while. Why should rich people living in SE Asia make money out of generations of civilised living here in the UK by acting as absentee landlords? Money being currently invested in the UK is apparently because UK is seen as a 'safe haven'. We, the indigents, have made it that safe haven and we, the indigents, should directly benefit from this hard worked for status.

Eric Alan Leach ● 4682d

You are correct Marie.Foreign buy to let  investors,who have no interest in our local communities (why would they?)are in the mix purely for they profits and as the saying goes 'money talks and bull**it walks' so the only way to level the playing field  would be to tax such landlords and to spend that tax locally .The EEC would have something to say about that tho' no doubt, not that foreign investors are buying property on the same scale anywhere else in Europe.

Keith Iddon ● 4682d

I cant see how they could legally stopped from buying these properties. The only way I can see to deter them is to make it less profitable for them. (ie high taxing for renting) Just waiting to be told I'm some sort off commie that knows nothing! Well I do know that the average worker cant afford to buy a house in their neighbourhood, and that is wrong and very bad for building community spirit etc. Something needs to be done to stop the price increases, fuelled by, amongst other things, the buy to let market. So what else can be done to stop this? Without having to wait years for a change in law?

Marie Shelny ● 4682d

Thanks Michael...I'm not too hot with computers!

Keith Iddon ● 4682d

As requested a cut and paste from TW87000 new build flats 5000 sold to overseas buyersThat's the statistic from Simon Hughes MP.Something that those in Brentford know only too well with so many new build apartments and developments in partial use.We have developers promoting 'buy to lets' and almost all developments are unaffordable to local people who do not fit the councils criteria for social housing but now cannot ever afford a decent size of home even on what is supposed to be a good salary.Labour MP Hilary Benn ( once a South Ealing councillor) has also stated that residents should decide what gets built where and not developers in deals with councils.So one wonders if Cllr Curran mentioned any of this on his tour with GLA housing people?We have massive developments here almost all of which will not make any difference to the real crisis of homes for ordinary people.5000 new build properties out of 7000 sold to overseas investors is just part of the scheming to hype up prices and prize out local people.A crisis is being created simply to line the pockets of profiteers and local authorities have been duped hook, line and sinker in particular in this district.It needs to be stopped and local councillors must take this seriously .

Michael Brandt ● 4682d

Interesting new thread with this heading started by Michael Brandt on the Brentford forum.

Keith Iddon ● 4682d

Agreed.(But then I am not the one trying to do the demonising. :-) )

Tony Colliver ● 4685d

To get back to Gerry's original question, the Times today seems to think that there is some hint of green shoots appearing, with the service sector apparently picking up and unexpectedly good retail sales in May.

Susan Kelly ● 4685d

And then we get the question "What is short term?"  Is it a day trader playing the technicals of the shares movement - following the up/down volume, the relative strength indicators, the various moving averages, etc. Or is short term, the buying of a share for fundamental reasons, suddenly getting a profit because it reported higher than expected earnings and taking a quick profit.  You were an investor to begin with, but found yourself with an annualized return of 100% plus, so you become a short term trader (a gambler some would say)

Charles Campbell ● 4685d

Yep - inflation: the greatest (and stealthiest) thief of them all.My dad used to call the process of robbing savers like this "obscene" with such venom and with a look of such clear murderous intent on his face that it used to make me wonder whether he was going to rush out and kill a government minister there and then every time he said it.As a result of this brutal earlier education in the facts of economic life I have never relied on my "savings" seeing me through.  There is nothing the government won't stoop to stealing from you when the going gets tough.

Tony Colliver ● 4685d

Difference between the short-term holder of stocks (a gambler) and the long-term holder of stocks (an investor).:-)

Tony Colliver ● 4685d

Yep - in the seventies vast numbers of small landlords were ruined by swingeing restrictions imposed by the government.Leading, as you say, to a wholesale drop in property available to rent......and ultimately, as the wheel turned full circle having ruined many people's lives and livelihoods in the process, these restrictions had to be removed again later.

Tony Colliver ● 4685d

Bingo!Spot on - well for most of that anyway.I take issue with this:"...only allow Buy to let deals for buyers with legally earned capital of over 70%."On what possible grounds do you seek to limit a small property business's right to obtain loans to acquire business capital assets to such a draconian (and completely untenable) extent?Separate to the above point but somewhat related to the overall theme of economic subjugation - if people truly understood how the fractional reserve banking system actually worked there wouldn't be a lamppost minus it's own banker swinging from it by the end of the week and I say this as someone who thinks that the banks are on occasion criticised unfairly:    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyDU4X8GSmE

Tony Colliver ● 4685d

And who can blame them given the state sponsored direct theft of their hard earned?

Tony Colliver ● 4685d

"Playing the stock markets is just another form of gambling."  LOL I wonder how come it has taken hundreds of years and trillions of pounds, euros, dollars etc of invested funds to finally realize that to own part of a company is a gamble and pointless.   

Charles Campbell ● 4686d

No Susan March 30th.The article is titled 'Forget Cyprus the real savings robbery is in the UK'.Easily googled.

Keith Iddon ● 4686d

Is that today's Spectator, Keith?

Susan Kelly ● 4686d

Phil,I heard a discussion on R4 a few weks ago about this and about how Cyprioys,amongst others,are relocating their money by buying property and in other ways.There is also a good article in the Spectator about how our savings are also being robbed in the UK, but by much more subtle means.

Keith Iddon ● 4686d

'Playing the stock markets is just another form of gambling.'    Not really. Rent controls would result in a wholesale departure of landlords from the market, leading to the situation I remember only too well from the 70s of its being almost impossible to find anywhere habitable to rent.Come to think of it, I suppose that's why we babyboomers are sitting on all that housing wealth: we weren't cunning investors, we just had no choice but to buy.

Susan Kelly ● 4686d

I think the real problem lay in our tax and pensions system.Many are reluctantly going into buy to let simply because the return over a long period is far better than savings or pensions.The fact that we get taxed on our savings, money that we have earned and already paid tax on, and that those savings also get used for others like banks to use and profit from, and that the return to the owner of that money is so small means that to make your labours rewards work for you you have to do something.Playing the stock markets is just another form of gambling.Pensions and financial services are so poorly managed that charges and costs eat away far too much of any return.It leaves property as a safe bet. Even if the return after tax and costs is small it will be bigger than any other investment. But the risk is low as with a population vastly outstripping the supply of homes and estate agents and developers controlling the market, prices seldom fall.With such a mess in Europe and a general keeness of some nations abroad to avoid paying taxes, London and the south east has become a property game mecca. Foe some property is a safe place to launder money, for others a safety net against career wobbles.But in the end we are building development after development of the wrong kind of housing all aimed at high end markets which bear no relation to local people and those who wish to live permanenty in one place ie Home.If this ridiculous situation is to end - and it should. The government needs to ban all new properties being sold to non UK residents, forbid letting by assisted owners and only allow Buy to let deals for buyers with legally earned capital of over 70%.The problem is there are too many making big bucks out of this. But it is a crisis which does threaten to undermine whole communities where even decent income people are being forced into hugely overpriced accommodation or out of their home districts for good.

Michael Brandt ● 4686d

Thanks Keith.I'm a bit underwhelmed by that report - the sub-editor must have had an early lunch.Has there been any mention of Cypriot investments in the press or government figures?

Phil Kay ● 4686d

If you google 'rise in foreign landlords' you will see an article from the Telegraph 29/8/12.

Keith Iddon ● 4686d

Keith - I had wondered about this too.  Where did you find these details, I'd like to see the base figures.  Thanks

Phil Kay ● 4686d

You may be surprised at the % of flats owned by foreigners,including corporations, and who have never set foot on British soil.One instance is the recent buying of property by wealthy Cypriots anxious to get their money out of Cyprus.

Keith Iddon ● 4686d

I think we are all agreed that it would be a good thing for people to buy their own houses Marie - I certainly do anyway.The question is: how to achieve it?The tired old "tax the rich" answer trotted out all the time is not the answer - not least because, actually, as I have tried to demonstrate in various other posts, the "nasty" landlords, that everybody hates so freely and with such a passion, are typically nothing more or less than ordinary struggling small business owners the same as all the other struggling small business owners.Like many a farmer, they *might* die rich, but until then they are for the most part engaged in the constant struggle to stay just one step ahead of the reaper...

Tony Colliver ● 4686d

Similar restrictions were certainly what was behind the decline in condition of the UK rental housing stock in the fifties and sixties.

Tony Colliver ● 4686d

I am not an expert on rent controls in NY but what I *think* I know is that they are not altogether successful having led to some pretty dire building maintenance issues as a result.I am happy to be educated however.

Tony Colliver ● 4686d

There is a huge moral question here.I don't see anything wrong with people purchasing a property to let if it is is with paid for by funds the have earned and paid tax on or been gifted from family etc.But to take a taxpayer funded scheme and profit from other taxpayers labours is totally wrong and the loophole ( which was actually encouraged by in house advisors in certain occupations) should be retrospectively closed and those who have done so should be charged with fraud. Because that is what it is.

Michael Brandt ● 4686d

Firstly, I never suggested that because a home was a necessity that it should be free, I bought mine. But it should be affordable/possible, for people who work to buy one. As it was when I bought mine. The reason so many cant is because the prices are just to high (amongst other things) the buy to let market has pushed up prices I think that we have to think of ways to stop this trend. High taxing is a deterrent. Secondly I never implied that the key workers were breaking any laws in buying to let, but I am shocked that they are because the whole idea of having this key worker scheme was because they couldn't afford to live here, (or so I thought). I have no Idea how the scheme works but if they are getting help from the government (us) to buy a property and then renting it out, is that right?  Of course some people want to rent , short term, but everyone I know that's renting long term are desperately trying to save for deposits but the prices just keep rising. As do their rents. And in a lot of cases those working people still are getting some benefits to help pay their rents. Surely it would benefit everyone (apart from the mega rich with their property portfolios) if workers were able to buy houses for their families. Most of the people I see in council housing don't work to pay their rent. Its the ordinary workers that have the housing problems.  In my opinion, and it may be idealistic but flash cars, holidays, designer clothes, (soft toilet roll!) are all luxuries, but a person being able to buy a house for their families is something our government should be trying to make possible for their workers, and not so much helping those of us that can afford 10!

Marie Shelny ● 4686d

Wot's wrong with my spelling? Utopia of course,not eutopia.

Keith Iddon ● 4686d

Yes we could build more council houses Tony but how about some of the rent controls like those in the 'socialist eutopia'of New York? They took a pragmatic and responsible approach whereas we have closed our eyes and thought of money.

Keith Iddon ● 4686d

There are plenty of people who actively want to rent rather than buy: students, foreign nationals, people whose jobs move them about a lot, people who simply aren't ready to tie themselves down to a mortgage. Someone has to own the flats and houses those people rent. Those people are called landlords. Demonising them is absurd.

Susan Kelly ● 4686d

Almost.  :-)Actually, there are errors in it if one looks closely.Also, the grammar is appalling.

Tony Colliver ● 4686d

There you go - everybody is an evil capitalist pig underneath - even "key" workers once they get the chance.Or is it that they are just taking a rational economic decision to improve their own lot and that of their families within the bounds of a contract which does not prohibit them from doing so?Under English law - until it is specifically forbidden then it is allowed.And long may such a legal situation continue.

Tony Colliver ● 4686d

Sorry Tony  should read impressed.  I can't even write one sentence right and you can do 100 without a single error.

Charles Campbell ● 4686d

I'm impressive Tony.  Did you write all that without taking a breath!! :))

Charles Campbell ● 4686d

Hilarious.You do have a basic grasp of economics do you?Who do you think is going to provide all of this housing - unless of course you are preaching a return to the failed (time and time again) 'socialist utopia' economic model?Do you know what - I think all citizens should be entitled to free loo paper as well.  After all, that is a necessity of living is it not?  By extension, it would clearly be immoral for shopkeepers to make a profit on the supply of said essential commodity so we should force them to supply it at a "reasonable" price by taxing them at a suitable rate... ooo shall we say 70%!  Before you know it of course, councils would be supplying "free" (which of course is code for paid for by taxpayers - *NOTHING* is ever *FREE*) loo rolls to the "needy" - but they would only get the nasty Izal 'tracing paper' stuff.  The good stuff - nice and soft - would be reserved for those identified as more "equal" than the rest of us and would be dished out free (see above for the definition of "free") to council employees and others highly favoured minorities.

Tony Colliver ● 4686d

You only have to live until you're 38 though (unless of course you are unlucky enough to be promoted :-) ).

Tony Colliver ● 4686d

Whilst I could take issue with some of the nuances in this thread they would be trifling so I shall leave them aside.Overall I would agree that the solution is to build more council houses.  I would want to see the issue of tenancies carefully controlled though so that the abuses that I have all too frequently observed in the past were not allowed to recur - i.e. tenants need to be genuinely needy and have to be moved on if their circumstances improve sufficiently.  I am sick to the back teeth of seeing council tenants with brand new motors on the drives of council houses fitted out with all the very latest expensive high-tech gadgetry.  If you can afford that then you can afford a mortgage like the rest of us saps.I must just correct one error though - please be careful not to tar all landlords with one brush.  it is true that a *proportion* of landlords are currently enjoying the relatively short-term benefits of the fall out as a result of the credit crunch and the resultant very cheap money that central banks have flooded the markets with (for the banks benefit of course - not landlords - or anybody else for that matter, landlords have simply been caught up the maelstrom of it all - and so far most have managed to avoid drowning) but this by no means extends to all landlords nor all of their properties.  At the end of the day, rents, whether you think they are a reasonable charge for a very expensive to provide service or the ridiculously inflated profiteering of fat-cat property millionaires, are set almost entirely by market conditions and by market conditions I mean here not the highest rent that the market will bear, but by the cost of capital - namely the debt incurred to purchase the property plus the interest on servicing that debt.  This is why rents in any given area are almost always (London hotspots notwithstanding, but even they are not entirely immune form this effect) fractionally above the cost of servicing your own mortgage on a property.  It's simple economics.  If landlords do not set the rent at this level they go bust and the bank repossesses.  Period.  it may suit certain factions to represent things differently to this but they are misinformed at best and deliberately mendacious more commonly.  Ordinary landlord profit margins are perilously thin until, which, just as with any other business of course, is by no means certain, until they are able to achieve economy of scale and have been in the business long enough for the rate of return on their first properties to have improved somewhat as a result of the passage of time (typically ten years).

Tony Colliver ● 4686d

You'll never get elected with that one though!

Tony Colliver ● 4686d

So the incentive deals, offered by the government, to key workers, nurses etc, are being used by those workers to buy to let? I am shocked by that. Although I've heard of a few tenants, from an estate in south Ealing, have moved into Dickens yard, so I know that local authority are paying rent on some of them, I just didn't realise it was 'key workers' who were renting them out. I presumed it was the more well off.

Marie Shelny ● 4687d

It's very different outside the London and inner home counties to the rest of the UK.But everything is measured by the rest of the UK and not London and area.Someone on £37,000 in London is barely on the scale and not going to even afford a studio flat in anything other than a bad area.Someone on the same in Malvern ( a nice place like Ealing) will get a 2 bed place easily on that income.The imbalance is hugeIt would be better if a buy to let property can only be sold as such if the buyer puts up 70% of the equity.Developers should be banned from selling buy to let deals and 40 % plus mortgages should prohibit renting of a property like they used to or charge 5% more.The problem is ( and exemplified widely in Brentford)  Developers et all have been offering buy to let deals on properties that they cannot sell at the price they want.Most people do not want to live beside Britain's most busy and polluted thoroughfare with a flightpath above and a railway thrown in.Those lucky enough to be in priority occupations and got the special incentive deals to buy have been the largest group taking the offer up.They then let the flats out mainly to local authorities as lets with fixed done deals and guarantees of the flat being returned in as new condition.So where do all these "can't afford to live in London" Police, Nurses and so on actually live?  Not in the flats they own.There will always be a need for rental and good landlords are out there. They invest their money. What is wrong is when others are investing taxpayers money intended for them to live in not to profit from.Finally, at long last parliament is to discuss this. A bit like closing the door after the horse has bolted. But local councils are still happily propagating this.

Michael Brandt ● 4687d

Charles, I was thinking of a 70% tax on rental property. Enough to deter anyone from buying to let. A property/home is a necessity for everyone. You only need one. So maybe profiteering out of homes is not quite right?

Marie Shelny ● 4687d

Possibly the armed forces.If you live long enough to collect it that is.

Keith Iddon ● 4687d

Btw, speaking of pensions, which are the best jobs to have nowadays, when it comes to getting a guaranteed good pension?(apart from policemen, civil servants local govt officers and postpeople?)

Gerry Tan ● 4687d

I think,although it may be anecdotal,that more youngsters live with mummy and daddy for longer in most countries on the continent and therefore have saved up more by the time they do move out.Affordable accomodation in London is one of the major issues.People are paying £100+pw for a room in a house or a lot more for a studio.All this at a time when mortgage rates are very low,which means landlords are making an increased profit.The only real way this recession has hit the well off is low savings interest rates and diminished pension pots.

Keith Iddon ● 4687d

"If your not confused about the economy, you don't understand it very well."  Charlie Munger at the 2013 Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting.

Charles Campbell ● 4687d

Rental income is already taxed at your tax rate.  What would be better would be to initiate a capital gains tax on profits from the sales of principal homes?  The Government would receive much needed income to use pay for benefits to the folks not able to own a home.

Charles Campbell ● 4687d

Would a big tax on any rental property, so that its not profitable, be the answer? That would soon bring the prices down to genuinly affordable to first time buyers. We only need one house to live in, and the buy to let market is fueling the price rises.

Marie Shelny ● 4688d

Compared to most of Europe we're actually doing pretty well - the unemployment rate is a lot lower, inflation is lower and business confidence seems to have returned. Probably the thing that is most telling is that Ed Balls seems to have stopped telling everyone that everything is broken - although having spent 3 years telling us things will only get worse his much hoped for domesday scenario doesn't appear to have manifested.

Tony Gould ● 4688d

Well fair do's and no reason why the threaad shouldn't be limited to the London situation - for my twopennorth then, it hasn't felt like a recession at all here - though that may just reflect my particular work/biz/family/social milieu.Not necessarily so in much of the rest of the island though, particularly those parts that always get it in the neck - but I too don't nowadays get out enough to properly assess it.

Chris Veasey ● 4688d

Chris, my feeling of seeming to feel as if the recession is at getting better, refers to Greater London only - I don't know much about the rest of Britain.

Gerry Tan ● 4688d

Sorry...'It'a shining example of 'jam today'...

Keith Iddon ● 4688d

Exactly Michael.It's a shining of the 'jam today' short term-ism that jumped up politicians employ to make themselves feel important.They know they will probably be re-elected because there is very little difference between parties and,particularly in council elections,hardly anyone votes so if they get more than a few hundred voted they will likely get in again.In the mean time,sod the poor.

Keith Iddon ● 4688d

I cannot understand how on earth Hounslow's officials in particular can waltz around with a load of GLA housing people and hawk Brentford as a perfect place for development and housing. Labour Councillors at that!Nothing built or being built or approved is anything like affordable. Not even to those who have good incomes.Looking closely shared ownership is actually a very costly option and social housing is off limits to many as they earn too much. But 'too much' is way to little for those who are working long hours and supposedly earning good incomes.They are caught in a complete minefield and a large part of this hangs on both councils and government for allowing developers too much slack and passing too many applications without any constraints on the mix and cost of the end result.The London area is being lauded as a goldmine throughout the world of property developers and they are queuing up to get a slice of the cake.That in itself should indicate that something is wrong, very wrong.When the government filly takes action of the antics of lobbyists they need to take the same action on the same thing going on in town halls.Just why are so many councillors involved with PR companies with property developers as clients?

Michael Brandt ● 4688d

Michael very true, this is leaving more and more people behind by the year. many of today's young people from nice homes face quite a bleak future. The sums just don't add up.

Peter Chadburn ● 4688d

Many new flats are bought by corporations,often foreign,for rental purposes,employing a management agency here.Some other flats are bought by well off people as a buy to let investment.The whole thing seems grossly unfair and weighted in favour of the 'haves'and makes it increasingly hard to get on the property ladder.If people can't buy,landlords can charge high rents,thus perpetuating the cycle.We need regulation and fair rents legiion like in New York if there is to be no more public housing built.All this happened as much under Labour as Tory.

Keith Iddon ● 4688d

If there is a recession, just who is buying property in this town and Brentford for vastly over the top prices? Who has that sort of money?No-one I know on a good salary can even get near affording a modest 3 bed semi or even a 2 bed place in Ealing or Brentford.It seems to me certain groups are doing very well thank you very much out of this recession and using it as excuse to accumulate at the expense of many.Clearly it's more than the banking industry that ain't quite right

Michael Brandt ● 4688d

Keiththat is in a sense the real point of this all. In the sixties and seventies we saw social mobility and people from poorer backgrounds achieving so much. Now I believe there is less mobility and the divide is becoming wider. In fact I can see a contraction of the middle classes as people get dropped off their comfortable lives back into the bottom pile by our modern free market (only really free for the big corporations.)

Peter Chadburn ● 4688d

The recession hits the least well off the most.If you have your own house,bought and paid for and no longer have to work or have a fairly well paid job, you can pull your belt in if you have to by not going out for dinner quite so often. The recession for the 'poor' is far from over and will not be for some years. For those who are well off,there has never really been one.

Keith Iddon ● 4688d

Sunshine and weather are the big factors. I think we all hibernated to some extent on the bad weather. the retail figures are a simple statistic. however many of the cuts in government spending have not occurred yet. so I think we have another couple of years to see how bad/good is the state of our economy.

Peter Chadburn ● 4688d

Are you referring specifically to west London, London as a whole, southeast England, England asd a whole, Great Britain, the UK, or ......?

Chris Veasey ● 4688d

Bernadette, the reason is that I feel things seem to be improving(slowly) and I can see more people spending on goods and services and the Retail Cosortium says so too. Also, people look happier and I feel quite jaunty too. The better weather seems to help with the feeling of wellbeing. Also, some of my friends and family say there's a slight improvement. Am I being too opimistic?

Gerry Tan ● 4688d

This is an interesting question Gerry. because of the shift in wealth away from the people at the bottom it is something that few of us will notice. In fact when we look at the holistic picture of our lives we see a balance sheet in which there is good and bad. however 2 or 3 statistics will be used by politicians to say things are good or bad. I see for my self a new job starting with 50% pay rise but then I see health service cuts to support investment bankers. I see disability changes and worries over care homes for elderly relatives. I see local planning worries where the rich are trying to destroy local communities. I also see the young if they are lucky working for minimum wage for part time hours. I see young people unable to get jobs in the construction industry. so I may be benefiting from a new job in a couple of weeks but I also see the world around me getting more divided.

Peter Chadburn ● 4688d

Doubt it, unemployed and claiming is 7.8%, add to that those on courses, those who are on disability or those unable to claim and it'll be higher.  What makes you think it's over Gerry?  Is it because the media have got bored of the story?

Bernadette Clover ● 4688d