On 09/11/2016 12:10, tim... wrote:

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

If they got bogged down in political claims about whether immigration is
a good thing or not, their main point would become a secondary gripe and
been complete missed

Yes, they chose their ground.

Bill

On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 13:48:03 UTC, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Martin wrote:
On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 12:20:53 +0000, "Dan S. MacAbre" wrote:

Martin wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2016 11:55:17 GMT, pamela wrote:

On 20:06 7 Nov 2016, Bill Wright wrote:

I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided. Now
Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they
don't say why the population has increased.

Bill

Worse than Jon Snow is the previous economics editor for Channel 4
News, Paul Mason. He's pleasant enough on the telly but very left
leaning and a good mate of wacko Greek economist and
self-proclaimed "game theorist", Yanis Varoufakis, who tried to
bluff Grexit with the EU but lost. \

You forgot "British educated and qualified economist" Varoufakis. My dentist is
related to him, a cousin or aunt?? Varoufakis has recently told Brexit
negotiators to expect the same treatment from the EU hierarchy as he got. I
expect worse. Greece's problems are that German banks lent Greece billions to
spend on German imports encouraged by the German government. Greece can't repay
the loans.


You might enjoy this if you have a spare hour or so.

https://varoufakis.files.wordpress.c...ne-paradox.pdf


I did enjoy the article. Thanks. So who is really wacko?


Dunno. Perhaps it's all theatre.

Well the world was meant to be a stage.... according to....

whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 13:48:03 UTC, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Martin wrote:
On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 12:20:53 +0000, "Dan S. MacAbre" wrote:

Martin wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2016 11:55:17 GMT, pamela wrote:

On 20:06 7 Nov 2016, Bill Wright wrote:

I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided. Now
Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they
don't say why the population has increased.

Bill

Worse than Jon Snow is the previous economics editor for Channel 4
News, Paul Mason. He's pleasant enough on the telly but very left
leaning and a good mate of wacko Greek economist and
self-proclaimed "game theorist", Yanis Varoufakis, who tried to
bluff Grexit with the EU but lost. \

You forgot "British educated and qualified economist" Varoufakis. My dentist is
related to him, a cousin or aunt?? Varoufakis has recently told Brexit
negotiators to expect the same treatment from the EU hierarchy as he got. I
expect worse. Greece's problems are that German banks lent Greece billions to
spend on German imports encouraged by the German government. Greece can't repay
the loans.


You might enjoy this if you have a spare hour or so.

https://varoufakis.files.wordpress.c...ne-paradox.pdf


I did enjoy the article. Thanks. So who is really wacko?


Dunno. Perhaps it's all theatre.

Well the world was meant to be a stage.... according to....


Good ol' Shakey.

On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 15:37:16 UTC, Bill Wright wrote:
On 08/11/2016 08:09, RJH wrote:
On 07/11/2016 20:06, Bill Wright wrote:
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total one-sided
bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that it's
partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't say why
the population has increased.


It's not population increase - in the main the physical shortage is due
to household composition (more smaller households) and empty properties.

So the programme was wrong?

If the problem is that more people live alone why isn't there a price
premium on small flats?

Bill

There is isnlt there, look at the price of 1 2 3 bedrooms
they don;t go up in price equally 100K 200k 300k

In article ,
Martin wrote:
Edna is Sir Les Patterson in drag.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Les_Patterson

Are you absolutely certain it's not the other way round?

--
*Everyone has a photographic memory. Some don't have film *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 09/11/2016 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

They don't restrict supply, they just don't build more until they have
sold the previous lot, its the same with most things that aren't based
on a production line.
This is because it costs money to build a house and not sell it while it
doesn't cost money not to build it.
Stopping a production line costs money so you may decide to stock pile
the product rather than stop production.


If they got bogged down in political claims about whether immigration is
a good thing or not, their main point would become a secondary gripe and
been complete missed

Shame that point probably wasn't true.

In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
There is isnlt there, look at the price of 1 2 3 bedrooms
they don;t go up in price equally 100K 200k 300k

Why would they? Is a two bedroomed flat always twice the size of a 1 bed
one? Or could it be likely only 1/3rd or less larger?

Hint. Normal rule of thumb way to compare relative values would be by the
floor area of the property.

--
*I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 09/11/2016 15:46, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
There is isnlt there, look at the price of 1 2 3 bedrooms
they don;t go up in price equally 100K 200k 300k

Why would they? Is a two bedroomed flat always twice the size of a 1 bed
one? Or could it be likely only 1/3rd or less larger?

Hint. Normal rule of thumb way to compare relative values would be by the
floor area of the property.


Building costs per sq ft are a lot cheaper for a two story house than a
one story. So flats should be cheaper too.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 09/11/16 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

If they got bogged down in political claims about whether immigration is
a good thing or not, their main point would become a secondary gripe and
been complete missed

IF population was stable we would only be building new houses by tearing
down old ones.

There's a greater demand because more and more people aspire to an own house

It's not that long ago that 4 families would share a tenement block with 2
rooms each (if they could afford 2 rooms!)

Quite hard to restrict stocks to elevate prices.

It's what they do

They have PP for an Estate for 500 houses and you think "that will help with
the local demand"

25+ years ago they would have built all 500 in one go and moved onto the
next estate.

now they build them out at 50 per year

tim

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 09/11/2016 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

They don't restrict supply, they just don't build more until they have
sold the previous lot, its the same with most things that aren't based on
a production line.
This is because it costs money to build a house and not sell it while it
doesn't cost money not to build it.

Yes it does

they have paid millions for the land that is sitting there idle

tim

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 09/11/16 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

If they got bogged down in political claims about whether immigration is
a good thing or not, their main point would become a secondary gripe and
been complete missed

IF population was stable we would only be building new houses by tearing
down old ones.

Its more complicated than that with a stable population that
is choosing to change the way it lives, with many more living
alone and far fewer renting rooms instead of flats.

Quite hard to restrict stocks to elevate prices.



tim





--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually
come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the
State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military
consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State
to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal
enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy
of the State.

Joseph Goebbels

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 8 November 2016 15:37:16 UTC, Bill Wright wrote:
On 08/11/2016 08:09, RJH wrote:
On 07/11/2016 20:06, Bill Wright wrote:
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided
bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's
partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't say why
the population has increased.


It's not population increase - in the main the physical shortage is due
to household composition (more smaller households) and empty
properties.

So the programme was wrong?

If the problem is that more people live alone why isn't there a price
premium on small flats?

Bill

There is isnlt there, look at the price of 1 2 3 bedrooms
they don;t go up in price equally 100K 200k 300k

That's for a different reason. The bedrooms dont cost much
compared with the other more expensive parts of the house
like the kitchen, bathroom etc.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 09/11/2016 15:46, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
There is isnlt there, look at the price of 1 2 3 bedrooms
they don;t go up in price equally 100K 200k 300k

Why would they? Is a two bedroomed flat always twice the size of a 1 bed
one? Or could it be likely only 1/3rd or less larger?

Hint. Normal rule of thumb way to compare relative values would be by the
floor area of the property.


Building costs per sq ft are a lot cheaper for a two story house than a
one story.

Yes.

So flats should be cheaper too.

Nope, because each one needs the expensive stuff,
kitchen, bathroom etc.

"tim..." wrote in message
...

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 09/11/16 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

If they got bogged down in political claims about whether immigration is
a good thing or not, their main point would become a secondary gripe and
been complete missed

IF population was stable we would only be building new houses by tearing
down old ones.

There's a greater demand because more and more people aspire to an own
house

It's not that long ago that 4 families would share a tenement block with 2
rooms each (if they could afford 2 rooms!)

Quite hard to restrict stocks to elevate prices.

It's what they do

They have PP for an Estate for 500 houses and you think "that will help
with the local demand"

25+ years ago they would have built all 500 in one go and moved onto the
next estate.

now they build them out at 50 per year

I find it hard to believe that there has been that change.

If there actually has, why do you believe that change has
happened, particularly with borrowed money cheaper now
and more demand for new houses than there was then ?

"tim..." wrote in message
...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 09/11/2016 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

They don't restrict supply, they just don't build more until they have
sold the previous lot, its the same with most things that aren't based on
a production line.
This is because it costs money to build a house and not sell it while it
doesn't cost money not to build it.

Yes it does

they have paid millions for the land that is sitting there idle

Yes, but there is even more money sitting there idle if that
land has houses on it that can not be sold on that land.

Makes more sense to be building houses at about the rate they are selling.

In article ,
tim... wrote:
It's not that long ago that 4 families would share a tenement block with
2 rooms each (if they could afford 2 rooms!)

My mother was born in 1902. So her family were really at the end of the
Victorian era, as she was one of the youngest.

4 girls and three boys. Their tenement flat had one bedroom. With a bed
recess in the kitchen for the parents. And a front room for best. Shared
loo - no bathroom. I can just remember that flat, as the eldest sister
never married and lived there until the 1950s. It still exists - although
they'll have been modernised and sold off, rather than rented.

--
*A woman drove me to drink and I didn't have the decency to thank her

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 09/11/2016 17:49, tim... wrote:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 09/11/16 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

If they got bogged down in political claims about whether immigration is
a good thing or not, their main point would become a secondary gripe and
been complete missed

IF population was stable we would only be building new houses by
tearing down old ones.

There's a greater demand because more and more people aspire to an own
house

It's not that long ago that 4 families would share a tenement block with
2 rooms each (if they could afford 2 rooms!)

Quite hard to restrict stocks to elevate prices.

It's what they do

They have PP for an Estate for 500 houses and you think "that will help
with the local demand"

25+ years ago they would have built all 500 in one go and moved onto the
next estate.

now they build them out at 50 per year

That's because you can't get enough manpower to build 500 houses at once
and nobody will buy them if they did.

They build them at the rate they think they can sell them as having
built houses in stock costs them money. Selling houses makes them money,
sometimes just holding onto the land makes them money, but its risky as
PP only lasts for a couple of years IIRC.

Demand dropped quite suddenly about 25 years ago and a few builders
around here were left with built houses they couldn't sell and they
ended up selling them to housing associations/councils on the cheap. The
private buyers weren't very happy.

The builders aren't going to get caught doing that again.

If you want to get all 500 built quickly you are going to need more
poles and a lot of cash to burn.

On 09/11/2016 21:03, Rod Speed wrote:



So flats should be cheaper too.

Nope, because each one needs the expensive stuff,
kitchen, bathroom etc.

Kitchens and bathrooms are not expensive, they go from cheap to stupid
and builders don't fit stupid as there is a good chance the buyer will
want something different and chuck it all.

On 09/11/2016 17:50, tim... wrote:

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 09/11/2016 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

They don't restrict supply, they just don't build more until they have
sold the previous lot, its the same with most things that aren't based
on a production line.
This is because it costs money to build a house and not sell it while
it doesn't cost money not to build it.

Yes it does

they have paid millions for the land that is sitting there idle

tim





Its cheaper than having land and houses sitting there idle.

In article om,
dennis@home wrote:
Demand dropped quite suddenly about 25 years ago and a few builders
around here were left with built houses they couldn't sell and they
ended up selling them to housing associations/councils on the cheap. The
private buyers weren't very happy.

The builders aren't going to get caught doing that again.

Since housing is an essential, does it really make sense to leave it to
the peccadillos of the market?

--
*Why is it that rain drops but snow falls?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wednesday, 9 November 2016 15:46:53 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
whisky-dave wrote:
There is isnlt there, look at the price of 1 2 3 bedrooms
they don;t go up in price equally 100K 200k 300k

Why would they?

Why would they do what ?.
Learn to read.
"
If the problem is that more people live alone why isn't there a price
premium on small flats?

Bill
"

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

In article om,
dennis@home wrote:
Demand dropped quite suddenly about 25 years ago and a few builders
around here were left with built houses they couldn't sell and they
ended up selling them to housing associations/councils on the cheap.
The private buyers weren't very happy.

The builders aren't going to get caught doing that again.

Since housing is an essential, does it really make sense to leave it to
the peccadillos of the market?

All markets consist of people, a fact which seems to escape you.

Not much escapes me. Except a meaningful answer to my point from you.

--
*If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

dennis@home wrote
Rod Speed wrote

So flats should be cheaper too.

Nope, because each one needs the
expensive stuff, kitchen, bathroom etc.

Kitchens and bathrooms are not expensive,

Lot more expensive than bedrooms.

they go from cheap

Nothing like as cheap as bedrooms.

to stupid and builders don't fit stupid as there is a good chance
the buyer will want something different and chuck it all.

Irrelevant to whether its more expensive than bedrooms.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article om,
dennis@home wrote:
Demand dropped quite suddenly about 25 years ago and a few builders
around here were left with built houses they couldn't sell and they
ended up selling them to housing associations/councils on the cheap. The
private buyers weren't very happy.

The builders aren't going to get caught doing that again.

Since housing is an essential, does it really make sense to leave it to
the peccadillos of the market?

You can say the same thing about food and for some strange reason
we do actually leave that to the peccadilloes of the market anyway.

Both with quite a bit of regulation on what can and can not be done.

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 09/11/2016 17:50, tim... wrote:

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 09/11/2016 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

They don't restrict supply, they just don't build more until they have
sold the previous lot, its the same with most things that aren't based
on a production line.
This is because it costs money to build a house and not sell it while
it doesn't cost money not to build it.

Yes it does

they have paid millions for the land that is sitting there idle

tim





Its cheaper than having land and houses sitting there idle.

but they wouldn't be sitting there idle if they didn't use the drip feeding
of houses onto the market to ramp up the selling price above current market
level.

timn

On 11/11/2016 09:45, tim... wrote:

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 09/11/2016 17:50, tim... wrote:

"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 09/11/2016 12:10, tim... wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total
one-sided bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't
say why the population has increased.

well you *can* see why they did that

they were making a specific point about how the house builders
artificially increase the price of housing by restricting supply

They don't restrict supply, they just don't build more until they have
sold the previous lot, its the same with most things that aren't based
on a production line.
This is because it costs money to build a house and not sell it while
it doesn't cost money not to build it.

Yes it does

they have paid millions for the land that is sitting there idle

tim





Its cheaper than having land and houses sitting there idle.

but they wouldn't be sitting there idle if they didn't use the drip
feeding of houses onto the market to ramp up the selling price above
current market level.



And there is nothing that can possibly go wrong and leave them with a
load of houses they can't sell.
Like an interest rate hike?
a credit squeeze?
etc.

In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
but they wouldn't be sitting there idle if they didn't use the drip
feeding of houses onto the market to ramp up the selling price above
current market level.



And there is nothing that can possibly go wrong and leave them with a
load of houses they can't sell.
Like an interest rate hike?
a credit squeeze?
etc.

And that simply wouldn't matter with low cost housing built to rent. Not
everyone wants to own their house or flat.

--
*Beware - animal lover - brakes for pussy*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Friday, 11 November 2016 16:04:53 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
but they wouldn't be sitting there idle if they didn't use the drip
feeding of houses onto the market to ramp up the selling price above
current market level.



And there is nothing that can possibly go wrong and leave them with a
load of houses they can't sell.
Like an interest rate hike?
a credit squeeze?
etc.

And that simply wouldn't matter with low cost housing built to rent. Not
everyone wants to own their house or flat.

Doesn't someone or some organisation have to own it in order to rent it to those that you say don't want to own it but rent it.

Even hotels hardly anyone want to own a hotel do they.

On 08/11/2016 15:32, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
JoeJoe wrote:
I sometime wonder if people voted for Brexit because of the BBC stance
on the subject.

You meant out of mad like?

No, but out of viewing their (vastly over-paid, almost exclusively
oxbridge graduates) arrogant and biased presenters that are as
antagonising as the politicians that most experts believe were the
reason the "plebs up north" voted leave.

Yes. Far better to take note of the vastly over paid 'oxbridge graduates'
like Boris. At least you had the choice there - given he changed his mind
so often.

And St Nige came from good working class stock, did he?

The very very sad thing is that all those 'working class plebs up north'
who voted out on the basis of *promises* of a better life after leaving
the EU are the most likely ones to be stuffed even more by an economic
downturn.

The idea that this Tory government would somehow insulate them from the
country as a whole getting poorer is simply pie in the sky. They've
carried on with cuts to benefits for the low paid employed. And you ain't
seen anything yet.

There's nowt so strange as folk...

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com

On 08/11/2016 08:09, RJH wrote:
On 07/11/2016 20:06, Bill Wright wrote:
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total one-sided
bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that it's
partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't say why
the population has increased.


It's not population increase - in the main the physical shortage is due to
household composition (more smaller households) and empty properties.


http://www.bluemarblecitizen.com/world-population/United-Kingdom

House prices are another, related, issue.



--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com

On 13/11/2016 15:52, David Kennedy wrote:

There's nowt so strange as folk...

'Strange' means 'not from round here'. You mean 'queer'.

Bill

On 08/11/2016 14:27, JoeJoe wrote:



are as
antagonising as the politicians that most experts believe were the
reason the "plebs up north" voted leave.



Are these the same experts that no-one believes any-more?

--
mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 13/11/2016 19:33, Bill Wright wrote:
On 13/11/2016 15:52, David Kennedy wrote:

There's nowt so strange as folk...

'Strange' means 'not from round here'. You mean 'queer'.

Bill
No. I mean bloody strange.

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com

On 07/11/2016 8:28 PM, JoeJoe wrote:
On 07/11/2016 20:06, Bill Wright wrote:
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total one-sided
bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that it's
partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't say why
the population has increased.

Bill

I sometime wonder if people voted for Brexit because of the BBC stance
on the subject.


TV is a big influence. Which is why I prefer to source elsewhere. In
the case of Hillary, it may be that her campaign did, indeed, give less
hope to people?

Another reasoning was that, because media gave Hillary a top of the
leaderboard stance, Hillary supporters, feeling confident, didn't bother
to get up and vote?

Television, other than a few programs, is mostly worthless.

My Grandad, during the 60's said, 'Son, never watch adverts. Pay
little attention to news'.

Broadcasters want us to sit still and watch.

Given that TV is big business, why should I ever believe that; what
they offer is in disregard for the business of itself and, is benefit to
me? How many businesses do that?

While on the subject of TV, beware the Smart device. A camera that
feeds much info to the controllers.

One night, you will invite a few friends around for a drink and a
film(disregarding it's source), only for the tv to tell you, 'Sorry, too
many viewers!'. Of course, like Cookies on the PC, only forced upon us
with best intentions and our best viewing experience at heart'. Aaawh,
so nice!

As for Hillary and Trump? Looking through the Net, Trump has done a
few things that have upset quite a few, ordinary, people. A golf course
in Scotland, as an instance.

Hillary, along with Mr Clinton? Out and out killer.

We will never, likely, find a 'people empowering' piece of news on TV.
Does anyone remember the 'all channels' exclusive news of 2011; Iceland
jailing bankers and ministers? There's a good reason we didn't!



....Ray.

"RayL12" wrote in message
news
On 07/11/2016 8:28 PM, JoeJoe wrote:
On 07/11/2016 20:06, Bill Wright wrote:
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total one-sided
bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that it's
partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't say why
the population has increased.

Bill

I sometime wonder if people voted for Brexit because of the BBC stance
on the subject.


TV is a big influence. Which is why I prefer to source elsewhere. In the
case of Hillary, it may be that her campaign did, indeed, give less hope
to people?

Another reasoning was that, because media gave Hillary a top of the
leaderboard stance, Hillary supporters, feeling confident, didn't bother
to get up and vote?

Television, other than a few programs, is mostly worthless.

My Grandad, during the 60's said, 'Son, never watch adverts. Pay little
attention to news'.

Broadcasters want us to sit still and watch.

Given that TV is big business, why should I ever believe that; what they
offer is in disregard for the business of itself and, is benefit to me?
How many businesses do that?

While on the subject of TV, beware the Smart device. A camera that feeds
much info to the controllers.

One night, you will invite a few friends around for a drink and a
film(disregarding it's source), only for the tv to tell you, 'Sorry, too
many viewers!'. Of course, like Cookies on the PC, only forced upon us
with best intentions and our best viewing experience at heart'. Aaawh, so
nice!

As for Hillary and Trump? Looking through the Net, Trump has done a few
things that have upset quite a few, ordinary, people. A golf course in
Scotland, as an instance.

Hillary, along with Mr Clinton? Out and out killer.

We will never, likely, find a 'people empowering' piece of news on TV.
Does anyone remember the 'all channels' exclusive news of 2011; Iceland
jailing bankers and ministers? There's a good reason we didn't!

That's a very jaundiced view. Its because of the media coverage we saw
that rioting in London with complete arseholes torching shops etc. And
now fools chucking a tantrum now that Trump has won too.

On 13/11/2016 22:03, David Kennedy wrote:
On 13/11/2016 19:33, Bill Wright wrote:
On 13/11/2016 15:52, David Kennedy wrote:

There's nowt so strange as folk...

'Strange' means 'not from round here'. You mean 'queer'.

Bill
No. I mean bloody strange.


Your sentence had the word 'nowt'. That means that it was in Yorkshire
dialect. So the correct word is 'queer' not 'strange'.

Bill

On 14/11/2016 01:18, Bill Wright wrote:
On 13/11/2016 22:03, David Kennedy wrote:
On 13/11/2016 19:33, Bill Wright wrote:
On 13/11/2016 15:52, David Kennedy wrote:

There's nowt so strange as folk...

'Strange' means 'not from round here'. You mean 'queer'.

Bill
No. I mean bloody strange.


Your sentence had the word 'nowt'. That means that it was in Yorkshire
dialect. So the correct word is 'queer' not 'strange'.

Bill
Not if I meant strange it isn't.

--
David Kennedy

http://www.anindianinexile.com

On 13/11/2016 11:56 PM, Rod Speed wrote:


"RayL12" wrote in message
news
On 07/11/2016 8:28 PM, JoeJoe wrote:
On 07/11/2016 20:06, Bill Wright wrote:
I've just watched John Snow's report from the US. Utter total one-sided
bias against Trump. Staggeringly one-sided.
Now Dispatches are on about the housing shortage. They mention that
it's
partly due to the 'massive population increase' but they don't say why
the population has increased.

Bill

I sometime wonder if people voted for Brexit because of the BBC stance
on the subject.


TV is a big influence. Which is why I prefer to source elsewhere. In
the case of Hillary, it may be that her campaign did, indeed, give
less hope to people?

Another reasoning was that, because media gave Hillary a top of the
leaderboard stance, Hillary supporters, feeling confident, didn't
bother to get up and vote?

Television, other than a few programs, is mostly worthless.

My Grandad, during the 60's said, 'Son, never watch adverts. Pay
little attention to news'.

Broadcasters want us to sit still and watch.

Given that TV is big business, why should I ever believe that; what
they offer is in disregard for the business of itself and, is benefit
to me? How many businesses do that?

While on the subject of TV, beware the Smart device. A camera that
feeds much info to the controllers.

One night, you will invite a few friends around for a drink and a
film(disregarding it's source), only for the tv to tell you, 'Sorry,
too many viewers!'. Of course, like Cookies on the PC, only forced
upon us with best intentions and our best viewing experience at
heart'. Aaawh, so nice!

As for Hillary and Trump? Looking through the Net, Trump has done a
few things that have upset quite a few, ordinary, people. A golf
course in Scotland, as an instance.

Hillary, along with Mr Clinton? Out and out killer.

We will never, likely, find a 'people empowering' piece of news on
TV. Does anyone remember the 'all channels' exclusive news of 2011;
Iceland jailing bankers and ministers? There's a good reason we didn't!

That's a very jaundiced view. Its because of the media coverage we saw
that rioting in London with complete arseholes torching shops etc. And
now fools chucking a tantrum now that Trump has won too.


And, you cannot paint me a red picture using blue paint.


....Ray.