Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

InternationalRockSuperstar

Members
  • Posts

    5,156
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by InternationalRockSuperstar

  1. and do what? yes, because they're so expensive in the first place due to state enforced land restrictions. would have fallen a lot more if the lax lending standards weren't being covered up by printy printy.
  2. righto - so you're saying I can go and build a house on what the statists have labelled "agricultural" land (usually less than £10k an acre) and they won't bother me?
  3. yeah, 'cos MPs, banksters and all the other public sector fat cats aren't at all greedy.
  4. nothing to do with state enforced planning permission then. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/latest/2010/02/03/man-loses-secret-castle-court-fight-115875-22016159/
  5. hardly surprising so many jobs are disappearing from the UK. have you seen the size of our enormous overheads?
  6. state enforced restrictions to trade and access to resources are preventing these jobs from taking place.
  7. wealth doesn't cause hyper-inflation tho. you're not going to get hyper-inflation without massive amounts of printy printy, and it's the gov't that's doing that.
  8. eh? have you been printing vast quatities of £20 notes in your garden shed?
  9. in a free market, I doubt we'd be using queen-headed paper as currency.
  10. and probably just as shit at critical thinking as the proles in any other Western country.
  11. no it just demonstrates that you can't quantify the level of state interference in an economy by simply dividing gov't expenditure by GDP. for example, the cost of enforcing planing permission by the state is not as great as the lost borne by those restricted by it. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1248226/Farmers-secret-castle-demolished-court-rules.html
  12. 0% should have an option by itself, rather than being lumped in with the first 5% of theft.
  13. why are you having to pay anything at all to unproductive people in order to put land into productive use though?
  14. obviously not. government is the ultimate monopoly. banks get rid of their competition thanks to state bank licenses, legal tender laws and massive government subsidies. none of this would be possible in a free-market I love they way you're trying to lump Barclays and Goldman together with a company that actually produces something useful! a free market is simply a venue where you can refuse any offer made to you. unless you intend to commit rape or theft, you should not have any objections to other people being able to refuse your offers.
  15. in past, states have failed, empires have fallen, currencies have been hyper-inflated and banks have gone bust even when oil production was rising, so what's your point? even the oil exporting countries are posting deficits... ...'cos their governed by idiots, just like us.
  16. yawn. statists trying to blame Mother Nature for their c0ck-up.
  17. the Great Depression? oh yeah that thing were Roosevelt devalued the dollar by ~40% against gold so he could bail out his banking cronies. no such thing as a deflationary collapse.
  18. me living in Bolton wouldn't cause you any harm or loss, so I can't see why you'd have a problem with it.
  19. well at least the 'prepared' will get to pick up some distressed assets on the cheap (assuming we don't get eaten by chavs etc).
  20. he's american. as an ex-banker and present landlord who also speaks out against those on state benefits, you'll notice he doesn't understand irony either.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.