fluffy666
-
Posts
10,124 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by fluffy666
-
-
According to the guardian only 1% of social housing lets go to foreigners which is a bit irrelevant.
What we want to know is what percentage of new lets go to foreigners.
And what percentage of those would go home in the case of either a recession, wages at home catching up, or both.
Even if it were 1/3, that would chuck 500,000 rentals onto a flat market.
-
with ML announcing their losses from last year- surely they wont have any further losses ?
IIRC, they said that last quarter - 'Everyone will announce all their losses in one quarter to ensure a quick return to profitability'.
-
It is this sort of thing why I am not nationalistic.
The owners/management will sell you down the river if they can make a few quid, without a seconds thought.
Why feel any loyalty, I hope when/if these jobs return to the country people say **** you, I am not working for you as I remember when you outsourced the jobs in the first place.
Also that is my ******* data they are using to make money with, my personal information, I dont remember giving permission for them to use it.
Why should have to pay them to see my own personal ******* data, they should be paying me!
******* *****s! arshole ******ing shit ******ing *****!
Eloquently put.
Just wait till the new NHS systems are finished go online. Looking on the bright side, your doctor will be able to find your medical records with a simple search. Only problem will be the search being on Google..
-
Damn. Had to reply. Damn.
Yes. 18 months ago I wrote a report for an organisation that very clearly stated that the offshoring strategy wouldn't save much more than 8% of costs over 3 years, would involve a large element of risk (would alienate several important clients, not to mention the unions) and that their best approach would be to performance manage the existing staff like they should have done for the last 10 years already. Obviously, I was a little more subtle than that in the wording but the message was clear.
Anyone want to guess what happened next?
Hmmm.. they went ahead, there was a strike and protracted legal disputes about redundancies, the offshore teams were under recruited and under trained, customers left in droves, revenue and profits collapsed and all the managers got big bonuses?
-
Back to the subject of the title of this thread;
As I've admitted previously, I work as a freelance outsource and offshore consultant. You hire me on a day rate to get rid of your expensive and inefficient IT department and replace it with a services contract, often based out of India (but other countries are getting in on the action). Yes, I do sleep very soundly at night so don't bother trying to wind me up about my choice of work.
Single question : Every recomended NOT outsourcing?
As someone who could potentially be threatened by this, the biggest problem I have with it by far is the non-competitive nature of it - employees are not told about the various bids and costs involved, and so other options, such as an affected department splitting off and forming its own company to do the development work, are not available.
I don't resent you - it's more the management levels that don't understand their own business.
Companies are desperate to cut costs. The effect will really hit about 6 months from now.We were always told that offshore contractors were a resource that could be turned up or down.. we may well find the truth of that soon.
-
IMPO, the prices are still way above what the majority of the houses are worth and I would need to see at least 30% falls before i even thought about buying.
But those semis in the Mayals are still adamantly refusing to head below 250k when 150k would still be too much. All those vankers in Mumbles still thinking their 2 bedroom, mid terraced fishermens' cottages are not worth a penny less than 220k.....are they high on lava bread??
I've even recently seen one of those holiday chalets(8 months jobs) in Caswell Bay sold (STC) for 79k. Just unbelievable, when 7 years ago you could by a proper 3 bedroom semi in Bishopston for 95K.
Take a look at Wrongmove (I'm sure you do) for S'x , it's entirely saturated with flats for sale in the Marina. A few years down the road and Townhill will be upmarket in comparison . I just despair.
If it wasn't for the Gower you could do the world a favour by levelling all of Swansea and turning it into a theme park. ( Nice to see you back MT)
http://www.newswales.co.uk/index.php?secti...=1&id=12437
Sonce 2001, house prices are up 110%, incomes 10% - so it would take a 40-50% fall to get back to trend. That would put a 3 bed semi in an average area at around £80-90k, which seems reasonable.
Flats in SA1 are another matter entirely, the asking prices are hilarious (400k for a flat in Swansea!). A look on mouseprice shows that people have been buying places in the maritime quater for £300k.. if thet's BTL then they may get a little singed.
-
It won't happen here because:
1. We do not have subprime loans.
2. Our economy has been growing for 10 years.
3. The policies put in place over the past decade will protect our economy from the world financial crisis.
4. Employment levels are among the strongest in the world and the highest among the G8.
5. Gordon Brown is a miracle maker.
6. Demand for flying-pig landing sites exceeds supply.
7. Freezing over of hell creates relocation demand in suitable places like liverpool.
8. Frequent blue moon displays over herefordshire created migrant-astronomer-demand.
-
I suggest reading up Austrian school economics, as you post contains several poor assumptions, as well as missing the point of my original post.
Which poor assumptions?
-
So what would people say at the suggestion of privatising food? "how will the poor eat", "who will stop the production of unsafe food", "what will happen if there is a food shortage" etc etc.
Free markets can provide any service in demand, I'm sure if we were attacked the general populace would be out stocking up on AK47s and claymores.
The poor only eat because of government handouts. The production of unsafe food is largely prevented by a blizzard of regulations which are prompted by the fact that unsafe-but-profitable food is sold every time the producers find a loophole. Food shortages are generally prevented by having government food stockpiles. Some 3rd world countries that were told to stop doing this subsequently suffered famine.
Not sure how any of that is 'free market'. Regulated markets are another matter.. but less ideologically pure.
Free markets work best for items that are:
(a) Non essential - you can take the 'don't buy it at all' option.
(
Transparent - the majority of consumers know what they are buying.© Infinately available - there is no restriction on quantity (at any price)
For instance, when it comes to TV sets, there is no absolute requirement to own a TV set, it's fairly simple to see what you are getting when you buy one, and if a particular model proves popular, you can just build another factory. So we don't need to regulate what TVs people buy.
For food, condition (a) is broken - you have to buy *some* food, and condition © is sometimes an issue. Hence food prices can spike up and down, and famines can happen.
Of course, it's always possible to construct a 'just-so' story about what would happen under an idealistic free market model, but that's about as realistic as a communist of 100 years ago constructing a just-so story about how the advent of communism would cause a paradise where government would wither away..
-
We had our house on the market in oct 07- 250 for 3 bedroom, north essex. Originally had a lot of interest from those wishing to move to this area etc- original offer was 247k but she pulled out at Xmas as no interest in her own house, so couldnt sell.
Put back on the market 2 weeks ago and had 5 viewings ALL from first time buyers only- we had dropped price to 240 and recevid offer for 237 and we have accepted it. Early days of course but certainly first time buyers are out in force. They also told me most people were pulling houses off the market as offers too low.
Now the big question for us....do we go ahead with the 600k purchase(500k mortgage) in the very popular commuting location 30 mins on the tube from eg Oxford circus. House is great condition, big Victorian terrace 3 mins walk from the tube station. Changing our minds(and reading this forum) every single day! We are desparate to move to this area for many reasons and it took us a year to find this house which is perfect for us long term.
If you feel your job is secure, you can afford a repayment mortgage on a 5 year min fix (10 years preferred), and you need the space.. then go ahead, but make a promise to yourself not to even think about house prices for a decade of so. A 10 year fix would at least protect you from interest rate spikes, and if inflation does pick you you'll be laughing.
OTOH.. if you want capital gains, or are stretching youself, or are in this short term, don't bother - you will quite possibly spend some time in negative equity.
-
town is leyland, lancashire place is golden hill lane. i think these 2 beds went on offer in 2004-5 and as i recall priced at 120-140 mark. i have no idea what this one was bought for, only it seems whatever it was, 120k seems to be stuck like a fishbone in a throat. perhaps this person paid 120k and cant take anything less. perhaps more ? though id go for 120k cos thats whats its always been for sale for. maybe this clued up investor bought for a crafty 110k and will soon be cashing in that superb investment opportunity. i wonder how much the monthly cost is.
ive removed the tel to protect the innocent.
she looks pretty doesnt she ???
HaHaHaHaHaHa...
Thought I'd do more research than the average BTL investor..
http://www.lancscc.gov.uk/office_of_the_ch...grossincome.asp
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-173...=1&tr_t=buy
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-162...=1&tr_t=buy
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-167...=7&tr_t=buy [3 bed end terrace for £100k]
Average household income in Preston (closest major area) is just over £30k. So the average preston couple could just about afford this place. IF, of course, they didn't want a 3 bed house instead...
The thing is, it is not very hard these days to do this kind of research, yet it seems there are a lot of people out there who have a whole 'portfolio' of these things..
-
What he needs is a kitchen.
And a loft conversion.
And to dig out a couple of floors below the house, extending to the margins of the property.
And an earthquake splitting the 'back2back' house off, to give a rear garden ('Needs some attention').
-
Mr Greedy
He didn't accept the offer that was 7% less than asking price last year but fast forward to today the best he can get is 16% less than the original price with no sign of recovery.
He can't even see the fact that he is chasing the market down. Keep up the good work! come May he will probably get offers of £125K if he is lucky
That really is a tiny house.. and with only 1 bed it's not exactly going to be attractive for families.
-
We get rid of fiat money and reissue gold & silver coinage. That way money itself has its own store of value.
And the consequent cash shortage (deflation) makes debt repayment impossible, leading to recurrent bankruptcy for the poor and a transfer of assets to the already rich.
Barter systems are all very well and good for simple items. However, I work in large scale telecomms software. I have no idea whatsoever how I would be ment to barter this, practical suggestions welcome.
-
+ peak oil is scare mongering by vested interests
+ you will always be able to fill your car and turn on the lights, it may cost you more though
+ oil has gone up 400% in the last decade with no real hurt for this country
+ peak oil is a weath transfer so for every looser there is a winner!!!
Peak oil is certainly not scare mongering (when the problem is adequetely constrained, anyway).
You may always be able to fill your car at a price, but what you fill it with or if you merely charge it up is another matter. However, physical shortages are not impossible.
We've been insultated from the price of oil first because it started from a very low base - another 400% on the price could be a different story.
-
Totally unexpected sudden surprise.
Citi is such a turd!
But.. but.. but.. who could have predicted that lending vast amounts of money to people with small incomes backed by massively overvalued houses could possibly fail?
When are these writedowns going to stop? 20 billion here, 20 billion there.. it's starting to add up.
-
This is all very depressing. Firstly that people should base their finances on 2 salaries without considering what happens when you have kids (something too that has helped push HPI so far). Secondly, that the way out is for her to work now and not be there for her baby or her two year old. These people can be criticised for borrowing too much but, they are still more useful people to society than many out there aren't they? Working hard (a nightshift when 7 months pregnant, can't be good surely?), not seeing each other much. It is such a good example of how our debt based, house buying obsessed society is helping to destroy the fabric of the country.
Joint-income mortgages have had this side effect.
But 80k over 2 years - that's over 3k every month! I suspect that a fair chunk of debt was there before the first baby... And they seem to have spent more on 1 car than we have on 2.
It's another example of people getting lots and lots of loans without any central check - would they have been allowed to get a single unsecured loan for £80k?
-
I think auto loans is going to be huge also. They have done the same off the books thing with them as with mortgages. Explains all those 30K 4X4 BMWs and Mercs though.
At least when you buy a house you are buying something that should hold value against inflation (over long enough time periods). Cars drop in value quite dramatically, especially when new.
But as for the thread title.. The impression I get is that after the disasters of the 1920s and 30s, the intention after WWII was to create a financial system that would be stable and hard to break - and ever since then end of Bretton Woods in 1971 (?), the various bankers of the world have been persuading governments to dismantle every last bit of the regulation designed to enhance stability. The consequences of this could be a really epic disaster.
-
Funny how someone can work in the City and still be unable to do basic maths - earning 50k p.a. and working 13 hour days is the same hourly rate (about £14) as someone earning 30k and putting in their regulation 40-hour week. Working those hours you would need to get a good 25% bonus every year just to make it close to worthwhile. I suppose a lot of them think they're 'on the management track' to make big bucks as CEO some day - well, not if the credit crunch gets them first.
[Note to self: Cunning Plan for 2008: set up a business where I can employ people like this for peanuts by convincing them that they're in a prestigious job and are 'on the management track'... ]
I honestly think it would be good for both employees and economy if it was legally enforced that anyone owning less than say 1% of the company MUST be paid overtime (at time and a half) past the standard work week. This would make presentieeism expensive for the company concerned, and so force it to look at raising productivity rather than just hours; it would also mean that employees actually had enough sleep and rest to do a decent job.
-
Imagine entering a society where less than 2% of the cars on the road are owned by those that drive them, and less than 1% of the homes are owned by the people who live in them.
Hmmm..
Somehow I doubt that 49 out of every 50 cars still has an outstanding loan on it, and 99 out of 100 houses has a mortgage of some sort.
It's possible that 49 out of every 50 new cars is bought with a loan/leased/company and 99% of FTBers use a mortgage.. but that dosen't sound quite as bad.
-
In short BTL is no longer a good investment at current price points from a capital growth perspective or from a rental income perspective. Values and rents will have to revert to mean. This will mean a drop of between 50-70% for some of these popular BTL properties.
High priced city center and new build flats are going to take a pounding - they seem to be cramped, noisy and badly finished to start with, throw in squatters and broken facilities and you could be looking at 70-80% for some of the worst.
-
Important to note: Banks are stupid. They work pro-cyclical. The more debt you have, the more they're inclined to think that you're a good debtor and give you even more.
Central banks are stupid too, by the way.
That certainly explains a lot. Luckily we have highly intelligent and rational governments to help us out of the mess.
-
It seems that developers are using every trick in the book to shift stock.I suppose their biggest sale technique is that they will take your house off you (since houses are almost impossible to sell now)and will let you have the house at the original offer price say 250K,when similar second hand properties go at around 180K. When this is exhausted they offer the 250K house at a 20% discount at 200K to those with cash,still 20k over its real value.When this is exhausted they offer the house at its true value of 180K,well not quite the buyer pays 180K down and the other 70 k is an interest free loan repayable to the developer after ten years.
Are buyers of new houses stupid,can't they see the identical ones they built last year are being offered at 25% below the new ones being built now on the second hand market and the ''retail price''is just a starting point for teaser discounts and px packages.
Saw this last time we moved - the place we bought was £230k, new builds (Same basic spec, slightly smaller beds and garder) £270-280k. 200 yards away!
New builds are worth a small premium.. but not 40k!
-
Sorry, yoy list a lot of things you are free to do, when they were never part of the original discussion.
You work for paper tokens (that are no different from any other bit of paper) or you go to jail and/or lose your stuff.
This is forced labour. Aka slavery.
You are told what to do via the magic of "the law". One man writes his opinion down (what you "should" do) and you do it or you go to jail and/or lose your stuff.
This is forced labour. Aka slavery.
You are forbidden from creating your own bits of paper, you are forbidden from creating your own opinions. Only your masters can do those things. You are "free" to do a hell of a lot, mainly in the area of how you will work to pay your masters bills but that is not freedom. It's just the appearance of it, a false dichotomy.
You must eat in order to stay alive; the laws of physics dictate that maintaining a non-equlibrium state whilst doing anything requires an external input of energy.
This is forced by the laws of physics! The laws of physics enslave you!
More to the point, complaining about the need to work for your basic needs is in the realm of teenagers..
Some Houses May Already Have Negative Land Values
in House prices and the economy
Posted
We bought a new-build in 2000, cost was £104k (3 bed semi, and we thought we might end up in negative equity, sold for £170k last year). Anyway, buuldings insurance for complete rebuild was £75k, which was apparently significantly more than build-from-scratch costs - I'd guess that the house cost no more than 50k to build. Say £70k now to allow for inflation. Mind you, I'd guess it was around 700 square foot..
So it could be that a 1200 square foot hous costs £120k to build, but at that size you are looking at 5 bed detached houses.