Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Economic Mugs


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#1 crash2006

crash2006

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,238 posts

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:12 PM

I see that the hot topic of the week is the 75k towards buying your home, most of you disagreed with this, but a year ago you agreed about eliminating council tenancy for life. Seem like i've always suggested that 99.999% including people on this site still fall for the government propaganda, in other words "thick".

Most know the aim, others don't, in fact the majority don't, you ALL fell for the end the tenancy for life, now they are bringing out buy your home and will discount 75k i guess i have to make it clear.

The whole idea about doing away with the council home for life was to increase later on the sell off of the council housing stock ( the majority were in favor), giving the push needed to sell it all off, a threat of the possibility of you losing your council home. and like always you ALL fell for it.:lol:

I'll tell you all again IF YOU WANT CHEAP HOMES YOU NEED SOCIAL HOMES, if you don't back social homes then your wishing to pay more for your house and have a lower standard of living, or even never afford one in your life.

I think i was the only one to disagree about the ending of life time tenancies.

Edited by crash2006, 03 April 2012 - 01:14 PM.

Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.
Privatize the profits socialize the losses.
Posted Image
what i think the coming year will bring
">
http://william-king....money/MOH1.html

i'm an economic prop3rty expert

We did'nt see this coming

Biflation

Posted Image


#2 Monkey

Monkey

    HPC Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,988 posts

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:21 PM

i've never been one for selling off the social housing, or any of thi Right to Buy schemes.

we NEED social housing. the asset should never be sold off.

#3 Joan of The Tower

Joan of The Tower

    HPC Shoeboxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,759 posts

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:25 PM

I see that the hot topic of the week is the 75k towards buying your home, most of you disagreed with this, but a year ago you agreed about eliminating council tenancy for life. Seem like i've always suggested that 99.999% including people on this site still fall for the government propaganda, in other words "thick".

Most know the aim, others don't, in fact the majority don't, you ALL fell for the end the tenancy for life, now they are bringing out buy your home and will discount 75k i guess i have to make it clear.

The whole idea about doing away with the council home for life was to increase later on the sell off of the council housing stock ( the majority were in favor), giving the push needed to sell it all off, a threat of the possibility of you losing your council home. and like always you ALL fell for it.:lol:

I'll tell you all again IF YOU WANT CHEAP HOMES YOU NEED SOCIAL HOMES, if you don't back social homes then your wishing to pay more for your house and have a lower standard of living, or even never afford one in your life.

I think i was the only one to disagree about the ending of life time tenancies.


Are you drunk?


Look out Dave, you will soon be handing the keys back mate.



The knimbies who say "No" demand..... a sacrifice!
Arthur: Knimbies of No, we are but simple hardworking families who seek affordable housing on the scrubland beyond these woods.
Knimbies of No: No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No!
Bedevere: Please stop opposing our reasonable demands!
Knimby of No: We shall say "No" to you... if you do not appease us.
Arthur: Well what is it you want?
Knimby of No: We will allow you to build your precious high density shoeboxes, so long as you do not move so much as....

(pregnant pause)

A SHRUBBERY!!!!


#4 Lepista

Lepista

    HPC Senior Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,497 posts
  • About Me:A 60% falls from peak bear.

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:26 PM

i've never been one for selling off the social housing, or any of thi Right to Buy schemes.

we NEED social housing. the asset should never be sold off.


I'd go further and say that FRWEE housing shuld be made available to everyone who wanted it.

It wouldn't necessarily be pretty, but would be massively useful for people wanting to save up for their house purchase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nothing sedates rationality like large doses of effortless money. After a heady experience of that kind, normally sensible behaviour drift into behaviour akin to that of Cinderella at the ball. They know that overstaying the festivities...will eventually bring on pumpkins and mice. But they nevertheless hate to miss a single minute of what is a helluva party. Therefore, the giddy participants all plan to leave just seconds before midnight. There's a problem, though: They are dancing in a room in which the clocks have no hands."

My favorite post ever:
By Ruffles the Guinea Pig

#5 crash2006

crash2006

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,238 posts

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:27 PM

Are you drunk?


Drunk, no p155 off yes.

Edited by crash2006, 03 April 2012 - 01:27 PM.

Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.
Privatize the profits socialize the losses.
Posted Image
what i think the coming year will bring
">
http://william-king....money/MOH1.html

i'm an economic prop3rty expert

We did'nt see this coming

Biflation

Posted Image


#6 Joan of The Tower

Joan of The Tower

    HPC Shoeboxer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,759 posts

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:28 PM

Drunk, no p155 off yes.


I'll take that as a yes.

Happy Tuesday!


Look out Dave, you will soon be handing the keys back mate.



The knimbies who say "No" demand..... a sacrifice!
Arthur: Knimbies of No, we are but simple hardworking families who seek affordable housing on the scrubland beyond these woods.
Knimbies of No: No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No!
Bedevere: Please stop opposing our reasonable demands!
Knimby of No: We shall say "No" to you... if you do not appease us.
Arthur: Well what is it you want?
Knimby of No: We will allow you to build your precious high density shoeboxes, so long as you do not move so much as....

(pregnant pause)

A SHRUBBERY!!!!


#7 tinker

tinker

    HPC Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,796 posts
  • Location:North West

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:30 PM

i've never been one for selling off the social housing, or any of thi Right to Buy schemes.

we NEED social housing. the asset should never be sold off.

Of course, social housing is needed. It needs to be cheap and affordable with a fair rent. The problem is the distortion from the credit-induced property bubbles of the last 10-20 years, coupled with a lack of supply of such property.

Selling them off - an election bribe under Thatcher - was a silly idea in the first place, and lit the fuse to future housing bubbles and consumerism. After the 90s crash when some normality returned, did Brown correct this - no. He encouraged another bubble, currently being propped up and encouraged by Cameron and co under these Elasterplast schemes.

Politicians are part of the problem. I don't feel that many on this site actually supported these sell-offs and misallocation of public money to benefit banks and developers.

#8 crash2006

crash2006

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,238 posts

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:34 PM

Of course, social housing is needed. It needs to be cheap and affordable with a fair rent. The problem is the distortion from the credit-induced property bubbles of the last 10-20 years, coupled with a lack of supply of such property.

Selling them off - an election bribe under Thatcher - was a silly idea in the first place, and lit the fuse to future housing bubbles and consumerism. After the 90s crash when some normality returned, did Brown correct this - no. He encouraged another bubble, currently being propped up and encouraged by Cameron and co under these Elasterplast schemes.

Politicians are part of the problem. I don't feel that many on this site actually supported these sell-offs and misallocation of public money to benefit banks and developers.


No most are not in favor of the sell off of council homes but they were in favor of end life time tenancies on this site and being brainwashed. Current council tenants would see this as threat so now they would rush out to buy their homes, as they could loss it.
Just look at the order of things first end life time tenancies, then a year later bring out a nice discount to buy your social home.

Edited by crash2006, 03 April 2012 - 01:36 PM.

Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.
Privatize the profits socialize the losses.
Posted Image
what i think the coming year will bring
">
http://william-king....money/MOH1.html

i'm an economic prop3rty expert

We did'nt see this coming

Biflation

Posted Image


#9 fluffy666

fluffy666

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,187 posts
  • Location:Bath-ish

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:42 PM

Of course, social housing is needed. It needs to be cheap and affordable with a fair rent. The problem is the distortion from the credit-induced property bubbles of the last 10-20 years, coupled with a lack of supply of such property.

Selling them off - an election bribe under Thatcher - was a silly idea in the first place, and lit the fuse to future housing bubbles and consumerism. After the 90s crash when some normality returned, did Brown correct this - no. He encouraged another bubble, currently being propped up and encouraged by Cameron and co under these Elasterplast schemes.

Politicians are part of the problem. I don't feel that many on this site actually supported these sell-offs and misallocation of public money to benefit banks and developers.


In theory, you could use council house building and selling as a counter cyclical tool.. build most in the recessions when house prices dip and unemployment means that labour is cheaper/more available; sell some when the economy is growing. Given that the private sector has never managed to build enough houses to keep up with demand, the government has to do so; the only alternative would be to relax planning rules to the extent that you could build on half the country.. which is OK by me, but even then getting all the houses required built could be hard.

#10 Lepista

Lepista

    HPC Senior Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,497 posts
  • About Me:A 60% falls from peak bear.

Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:46 PM

I'd go further and say that FRWEE housing shuld be made available to everyone who wanted it.

It wouldn't necessarily be pretty, but would be massively useful for people wanting to save up for their house purchase.


http://www.housepric...howtopic=154228
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nothing sedates rationality like large doses of effortless money. After a heady experience of that kind, normally sensible behaviour drift into behaviour akin to that of Cinderella at the ball. They know that overstaying the festivities...will eventually bring on pumpkins and mice. But they nevertheless hate to miss a single minute of what is a helluva party. Therefore, the giddy participants all plan to leave just seconds before midnight. There's a problem, though: They are dancing in a room in which the clocks have no hands."

My favorite post ever:
By Ruffles the Guinea Pig

#11 council dweller

council dweller

    HPC Guru

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,324 posts
  • Location:between the wash and the smoke

Posted 03 April 2012 - 02:45 PM

My current rent is 90 a week and will be 120 in around 2016, after that rents will go up by the inflation rate +1/2%. No rent means we have one less thing to worry about, that's all.

We have more than enough cash in the bank....why wouldn't we buy?
Don't breed or buy while cats and dogs die. (sticker seen on back of van on M25)

'Materialism and ego fragment our world into opposing factions and make us lose sight of the whole. Find balance, transcend the demands of the ego, see beyond the materialistic values which trap us in cycles of competition and scarcity.' (Tao de ching)

'I hold three treasures close to my heart: the first is love, the next is simplicity, the third, overcoming the ego.' (more Chinese mumbo jumbo)

It's time for a revolution that will put an end to self-serving governments and the likes of Blair , Brown and Thatcher. (barebear)

#12 Game_Over

Game_Over

    I live on HPC!

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,906 posts
  • Location:North of Watford

Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:21 PM

I see that the hot topic of the week is the 75k towards buying your home, most of you disagreed with this, but a year ago you agreed about eliminating council tenancy for life. Seem like i've always suggested that 99.999% including people on this site still fall for the government propaganda, in other words "thick".

Most know the aim, others don't, in fact the majority don't, you ALL fell for the end the tenancy for life, now they are bringing out buy your home and will discount 75k i guess i have to make it clear.

The whole idea about doing away with the council home for life was to increase later on the sell off of the council housing stock ( the majority were in favor), giving the push needed to sell it all off, a threat of the possibility of you losing your council home. and like always you ALL fell for it.:lol:

I'll tell you all again IF YOU WANT CHEAP HOMES YOU NEED SOCIAL HOMES, if you don't back social homes then your wishing to pay more for your house and have a lower standard of living, or even never afford one in your life.

I think i was the only one to disagree about the ending of life time tenancies.


And what did humans live in for the 99.99% of history before social housing was invented?

And the only reason private housing and rents are unaffordable is because of

GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES

:blink:

#13 Game_Over

Game_Over

    I live on HPC!

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,906 posts
  • Location:North of Watford

Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:24 PM

My current rent is 90 a week and will be 120 in around 2016, after that rents will go up by the inflation rate +1/2%. No rent means we have one less thing to worry about, that's all.

We have more than enough cash in the bank....why wouldn't we buy?


Trouble is the Government is essentially bankrupt

so where the money is going to come from for subsidised council house rents

and 20 Billion+ in housing benefits in the future

Is anyones guess

My guess is that this model is beyond saving

Just seems that most people haven't realised this yet for some reason

:)

#14 GBdamo

GBdamo

    HPC Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,613 posts
  • Location:Too far gone to come back

Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:25 PM

And what did humans live in for the 99.99% of history before social housing was invented?

And the only reason private housing and rents are unaffordable is because of

GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES

:blink:


Anything they wanted and could keep.

The came government, they made the keeping easier but the getting vastly more difficult.
<!--sizeo:4--><span style="font-size:14pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--> <!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec-->

#15 crash2006

crash2006

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,238 posts

Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:26 PM

And what did humans live in for the 99.99% of history before social housing was invented?

And the only reason private housing and rents are unaffordable is because of

GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIES

:blink:

its government regulations, not subsidies that caused high house prices. the state was meant to help and provide the basis such as housing and health.
Housing became unaffordable because of various policies including using the money from the last sell off to fund other policies rather than re using the money to build new homes.
Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world.
Privatize the profits socialize the losses.
Posted Image
what i think the coming year will bring
">
http://william-king....money/MOH1.html

i'm an economic prop3rty expert

We did'nt see this coming

Biflation

Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users