Not all homebuyers are first time buyers, so no contradiction?Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Printable View
Not all homebuyers are first time buyers, so no contradiction?Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Perhaps contradiction was not the right word, nonetheless I remain confused. I don't really understand the first statistic (which related to the US in any case). I've yet to receive an explanation for what a "median homebuyer" is. If the stat just means that people buying all homes - whether their first or twenty-first - are getting older, then I'm not sure what that tells us?Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
If people are buying their first home at an older age I guess it tells us that home ownership is becoming more difficult?Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Average age for a first time buyer is between 32 and 35 depending where you read it, it's rising though. They're either renting or staying with parents up to that age which I suppose will also effect population growth. In the case of people in living wage jobs I don't see how they would ever get on the housing ladder which also raises the question of future pensions, how do they survive on state pension and pay rent?Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Your post did not state that the stats you provided related to first time buyers ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
And if that is what you meant, the numbers are clearly gibberish.
Wasn’t my post?[emoji2369]Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
None of the numbers are contradictory they are complimentary. In every metric the average age is increasing by a decade. First time buyer, age people leaving home average age of houses bought. They don't mean anything on their own but there is a clear trend. It's not complicated as it's obvious and alarming how high the rises are.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Well thank you for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
:tsk tsk:Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
https://x.com/AuditorGenScot/status/...a6exfOMPA&s=19
"40 per cent of pupils in Scotland’s state schools receive additional support for their learning.
But the Scottish Government failed to plan for the impacts of an inclusive approach to ASL."
This is a really difficult subject as I think any government would struggle to meet the needs of every single child, so yes the SNP are in power but I think this would be a challenge for any party in government.
I have to say I have a child with ASL and actually I can't fault the support he gets, so he is perhaps one of the lucky ones.
This should be a priority for all parties in the run up to the 2026 elections.
I have to agree, my grandson is autistic but the support he has received in his education has been exemplary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamie_1875
Good to hear positive feedback such as this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Berwickhibby
Quote:
Originally Posted by Berwickhibby
The interesting thing about education is that while there are frequent reports of its shortcomings, whenever parents are asked about their kids own school they usually answer that they are very happy with and think it is doing a great job.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have heard some complete horror stories as well where kids are being really badly let down. I think in my case my son has a formal diagnosis, that opens doors and unlocks funding. There are kids waiting years for a diagnosis though. There are plenty of kids being let down through no fault of the teacher or school, the teacher has a class of 30 and if nearly half require additional support it causes lots of issues as the kids who don't need support are not reaching their potential and the kids who do need it are not getting it in a formal way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I would like to see all parties come together on this and share ideas and suggestions on how to improve it, as the report says the Scottish Government have failed here.
Nicola Sturgeon has announced she is standing down from Scottish politics.
The former first minister has revealed she will not contest next year’s Holyrood election, in confirmation that had long been expected following her resignation as SNP leader two years ago.
No surprise, and no loss. She's barely done anything to justify picking up a wage as an MSP since standing down as FM.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Maybe operation branch form will finally go for a prosecution?Quote:
Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Huge loss to the parliamentQuote:
Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby
In what sense? She's barely spoke in parliament in the last two years.Quote:
Originally Posted by JimBHibees
Agreed …absolute wage thief …along with a few others from various party’sQuote:
Originally Posted by GlesgaeHibby
What's her greatest political achievement achieved through the parliament?Quote:
Originally Posted by JimBHibees
Aye the day before the polls open next year no doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Not insinuating that all the delays are politically motivated at all
Probably her election record and leadership of her party.Quote:
Originally Posted by jamie_1875
Keeping the SNP to the left of centre and mitigating against several unfair UK government policies.Quote:
Originally Posted by jamie_1875
Looking at the current Labour government, the SNP are the nearest thing we have to a socialist party, that's mainly down to Sturgeon's leadership.
Fair enough but I was meaning more something she did with the powers she had that didn't involve giving stuff or money away. Education was what she asked to be judged on, not sure she passed that one and it probably depends on which set of stats you use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibrandenburg
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeons-legacy-first-minister-34844455
Probably a fair summary above.
I think my point was a valid one and maybe if she didn't have to divert so much money, then her record on education might have been better.Quote:
Originally Posted by jamie_1875
From a personal perspective, when the SNP came to power and she became the Cabinet Secretary for Health she led a mini revolution in the NHS in Scotland.Quote:
Originally Posted by jamie_1875
Scotland made its own path then and I wouldn't be the only one to suggest that led to the Scottish NHS outperforming it's neighbours since then. I was speaking with the head of the NHS in England at a UK medical conference about the merits of the different systems a few years after the divergence. After a fair discussion I asked him 'bottom line, where would you prefer to be if you were ill?' "Scotland" he said!
If only the NHS (UK wide, even the not as good England and Wales) was as good now as it was then.
LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by jamie_1875
That Daily Record article is virtually unreadable due to the ads on the page. And when you do get to the article itself, it's a list of disjointed comments that look like they've been compiled by AI. Phrases like "failed miserably" have no place in a fact and context free piece like that. A complete waste of my time looking at it. If that's considered to be a "fair summary" then we're all doomed. Please don't post links to the Daily Record again.
Just don't read them! And it was an opinion piece and lots of people believe she did fail miserably.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
I read it because you said it was a fair summary. It was not. It was a hack job by someone with a longstanding dislike of Scottish independence, Sturgeon and the SNP. He couldn't be fair about her if his life depended on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jamie_1875