Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

miko

New Members
  • Posts

    4,833
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by miko

  1. There always was a lot of money in London , it lived in the West and the North of the city , some parts of the South were quite uppercrust the rest of the South and all of the East was for the average and the poor . The influx of the Global rich and more of our own rich came along without enough housing in the best parts of London so they went into the poorer areas . Many parts of East London are still quite rough but there are monied people living in them as well. Take a look at the Ex council flats in Hoxton , people saved all their lives to get out of there or were on waiting lists to be moved for years on end . Today a small three bed Ex council flat there will set you back £350k + . Speaking to a women recently who grew up there , she went to a school elsewhere and lied to people never telling them she lived in Hoxton. Today her parents have bought their council flat and she now boasts that her parents live there . Other areas that were once sneered at and are now expensive include , Leyton, Leytonstone, Tooting, Balham , kings cross, Camden Town ect the list is endless.
  2. It is a tale of two citys . The one in ten in London ( I bet it is a lot more ) do not count , they are there but are not part of the great ,vibrant , rich city. Those with the good jobs and the money do count. Those inbetween average paid jobs are having a rough time trying to house themselves. Take Newham , Tower Hamlets and Hackney they are just a few miles from the city and the workers there will populate these places and pay the prices . There is even an overspill into Barking where first job city and Canary Wharf workers will rent a one bed for £950 a month. Nowhere is the divide more pronounced than in Tower Hamlets the rich Canary Wharf Sky Scrappers can be seen from the mean downtrodden streets less than a mile away.
  3. Freedom in having the choice to work or not . Most have to work that is not Freedom. Feed and clothe 4 kids without a man , you said in another post you get all your work done in 2 hours . What kind of job do you have that only takes you 2 hours a day and would pay enough to put the roof over the familys head plus food and clothes for 5 people.
  4. I think it is more a case of the locals being forced onto benefits not lured away as the wages were so low. £6 p.h. Does not run a home never mind pay the rent or mortgage on it.
  5. No its not nonsense Earn more and then just pay more for something does not make anyone better off. If house prices were affordabel on one full time income of 40 hours , what is the point of needing 80 hours of work for the same thing. Just because more women have opted to stay in the work force does not mean more people are working , that would only be the case if we had zero unemployment and women opted to stay working. At present while a working mum stays in the workforce someone else stays out. Coupled with that how many people have stayed in employment both male and female beyond retirement age due to the high cost of housing ? Again forcing others out.
  6. Have heard more than a few 30 something working mothers who have to struggle in order to juggle work and motherhood say " we have been coned " Plus those working mothers forced to stay in the workforce are not giving up the jobs for the next generation who have been stopped from entering it.
  7. Yes and looking back to 1992 maybe he had more of a grasp then , it was not him who lost the money on Black Wednesday when we were forced out of the EMF , It was John Major , he was directing Lamont who was just the fall guy and ended up taking the stick for it . Remember the documentries that came out a few years later , John Majors incompetence and stubboness were quite unbeleivable.
  8. I think we already are going back to Rachman ways In many parts of the south east and especially London where there is overcrowding rooms in Garden sheds let for £100 p.w.
  9. Yes when they give out the unemployment figures it is UNEMPLOYED AND CLAIMING , there are god knows how many more out there who do not bother to sign on or who are not allowed to sign on . Then add in how many are in temp , part time , every now and again jobs , the figures are horrendous. When I left school in 1979 we were told that in 10 -15 years we would be in the leisure age where we would only work 2 days a week . Maybe that was someones fantasy or dream ( like we would have moving pavements everywhere by the year 2000 ) however we have moved somewhere towards that without changing working practices to fit the new situation. After the war the working week was anywhere between 55 and 60 hours , they laughed at the workers who wanted the 40 hour week and paid holidays . However by the 70's the 40 hour week was the norm ( i wonder how much unemployment there would have been then if they had not cut the working week ) . In 1980 the 40 hour week went to 39 , some were already on less some did not get that cut. In the last 31 years the working week has never been cut again . If anything for many the working week has increased UNPAID overtime is something that has crept in more and more in the last 30 years along with flat pay instead of time and a half for those working paid overtime. They should have cut the working week over those years but they did not , you cannot have it both ways we either share out the work or accept high unemployment , at present the govenment both past and present would rather have a dig at the unemployed instead of waking up to the fact that there is not enough work to go around for everyone to work full time.
  10. So why don't BMW reduced the prices to everyone and get their unsold stock out the door , any other business would have to and then the general public could join in the discount frenzie. The 1,700 up front payment comes from the tax payer , the vat now 20% is lost by the tax payer and they stump up the 3 years rent and costs to service insure and tax the car .
  11. I wouldn't get out of bed and pi-s on the floor for that money . Don't sell your self short libspero you will after NMW jobs next.
  12. Hang on im getting a bit confused here . In post 31 who buys for £17k and then trades it out when they get it back for almost the same ? Who gets the £7300k over the 3 years ? and who get's the vat back ?
  13. Look at a different way they don't rent a car, they get a new car provided by the tax payer every 3 years , taxed , serviced and insured .If you want to talk about renting anyone that buys a new car either cash or on HP is also renting because they pay their money and have the car for x amount of time before they either need to trade it in and pay some more for a new one or it is scrapped. As for stumping up around £3k who does that come from ?
  14. That is not how you put it in your post 31 , that post showed motability as very good for the dealers.
  15. Well your post contridicts the one from Witsend , who said they could not change the up front payments during the years. Taking your figures from paragraph 2 , the govenment or more correctly the tax payer pays £7300 in rental payments over the 3 years and then returns the VAT to the BMW or any other car manufacture , so another cost to the tax payer . How can those figures not be reduced by putting people in cheaper cars ? I used to have a new car every 3 - 4 years and at one point had a Merc. Well times change and I had to cut back the Merc was traded in for a Focus . The Focus I kept for 7 years and I had no major issues with it , it never needed big money spent on it . This year I looked at the costs of a service and mot and decided that I would change the car as I thought the time was approaching when big money might be needed to keep it on the road. I also need a reliable car to get to work and pay my taxes. So I bought a new Fiesta the VAT was 20% because times are hard and the govenment has to claw in more money . Surley they should be looking at Motability and how the costs can be reduced . If I had no major problems with a Focus that had done 80,000 miles in 7 years providing a car for someone who does not need to travel to work and therefore does less miles they could have a car for longer . Cars are a big part of the economy it is a pity the govenment do not look at ways for working people to be able to afford more new ones instead of just enabling tax funded people to drive a new one every three years with no service, insurance and Mot worries. If people on benefits can afford any kind of top up payment does that not tell us that maybe their benefit payments are another thing that could be looked at and reduced ?
  16. In London they are also exempt from the conjestion charge. Not just that but they can also nominate another car belonging to family or friend who might need to drive them at some point to also get the exemption.
  17. Well if the top up payments remain the same the top up for a sport BMW in 2008 was £3k not £6k . So like the papers your post was a distortion of the facts.
  18. Not quite The amount of money that has to be stumped up varies from manufacture to manufacture and varies from time to time . If BMW have a large stock of cars they want to get rid of they will drop the top up payment. I know someone who got a BMW sport a few years back and paid £3000 top up . He was able to come up with this money using a high rate CC and when he went bankrupt a while later the debt like all his others was written off. Unlike working bankrupts who have to sell expensive cars and can only keep a car if they can prove they need it for work and it has a value under £2k he was able to keep his car . Also unlike working Bankrupts whos ongoing salary is taken into account when assessing what they have to pay back after bankruptcy he did not have to pay back anything. Why do you KNOCK the artical because it was in the Daily Mail , funny thing is it was in the Sunday times a few months ago. The day after it appeared a friend I had told about the person getting the BMW phoned and addmited that when I had told him he thought I was telling pokeys until he had read it in the Sunday Times. Why is it a kicker at the end of the lease . They take the car back just before it needs an MOT and if you have not got the lump sum for a new BMW , you can still walk away with a brand new more basic car like a Focus ( how bad is that ? ) without having to put your hand in your pocket. If the benefit is stopped , then it proves you did not need it or do not need it anymore . Might sound Im having a dig at the dissabled im not ,but when the average and below average working person is being squeezed untill the pips squeak and the only GRAIN of hope we have to look forward to is IT IS GOING TO GET WORSE seeing people who are looked after enough driving around in luxury cars is taking the pi-s.
  19. Why do you call them a fool , for buying a house . You were telling us on here the other day that you have a millionair son who has a house in Cheshire . Do you refer to him as a fool for buying his house.
  20. 1. There is a thread on this site posted today quoting the public sector cutbacks might be 50% higher than first thought. 2. The rich don't need any more tax breaks . There have not been any major rises for them either like there have been for the poor and average. 3. Have you figures to prove that ? Only my own opnion but the gap is growing at a massive rate. 4. Well they don't need to do they queues of people for every job destroyes workers rights with out them having to lift a finger. Plus . U Turn Dave and IDS always digging out the unemployed when it is plain for everyone to see that there is a shortgage of jobs and more people than jobs , so x amount are always going to miss out . They speak on the subject as if there are millions of empty jobs. U Turn Dave who does not have a clue about being hard up telling people to pay off their debt's. 9k a year tuition fees . The HB cuts really are a kick in the bollo-ks for any people without kids who are under 35, take a look. Maybe that is some of the reasons.
  21. Bush , Goodwin , Merv were all pre boomers did they learn from their kids ?
  22. Ok keep to the 1975 cut off date those born after that have borrowed to consume just like the boomers if not they have borrowed even more to buy tat than any other generation . If your hated boomers were pre 1965 and the fked generation are 1975 onwards , what about those born inbetween 1965 and 1975 . What have they done ? who are they ? where do they fit in with all this ? did they clear up after the boomers or join in and want even more ?
  23. Going by your own dates I think you will find Kirsty is a post boomer. Thinking about it so is Sara Beaney , I don't think the kind of people that were bred after WW2 are any different to the kind of people born before WW2 or post 1965 come to that.
×
×
  • 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.