Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


New Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by snowflux

  1. There is a link of this topic student boy.

    But as you are too simple and not very bright i will give you a quote.

    "We operate in an area that is largely a migrant population. From a commercial point of view and a human point of view, we are not concerned about what the ethnic origin of the tenants is.”

    I think you cn now accept the use of the word "much" is acceptable, or does it upset your pc little mind?

    Now come on student union boy tell me a migrant could be from anywhere in the world and not just the EU.

    You said that much of his income comes from EU migrants. The distinction is important, since the entire context of the discussion revolved around the benefits enjoyed by EU migrants. You obviously can't substantiate that claim. A simple apology will suffice, and we'll leave it at that.

  2. The Tea party in its original form want a small non interfering govt, that is what right wing means. This is similar to what UKIP are wanting.

    They want a form of capitalism, not the crony capitalism and totalitarianism you pro EU LIBLABCON retards have brought in.

    What is wrong with not wanting the govt to be arm deep in your pocket? Come on student boy explain yourself.

    Personally, I prefer the relative social cohesion, better healthcare and longer life expectancies that Europeans enjoy over Americans. I certainly have no desire to live in the sort of Mad Max hell-hole that the US would tend towards if the Tea Party were to gain control there.

  3. He said so himself, does the fact that he said it not mean it becomes fact.

    And it is you and your fluffy left wing nonsense that is the utter crap written on here, are you still upset that you lost an argument a while i took your student union logic apart.

    And it is also a fact that its socially acceptable to hit Guardian readers, though i wouldnt myself as id never pick on confused simpletons.

    Sigh. I'm still waiting for you to give some sort of evidence to support your claim. Where did Charalambous say that many of his tenants are EU migrants? Link or it didn't happen.

  4. Those who you refer to were on the Left of the political spectrum. Hitler and Mussolini practised exactly the same politics as Stalin and Lenin: mainly the state BEFORE the individual. Right wing is about Libertarianism, that's what I hear 'mostly' from UKIP. Nazism, Fascism, Communism and Socialism was/is about the conquest of the individual by the state.

    Look at the size of the 'state' in Britain, it's bigger than private enterprise. Just like the Nazis and the Commies, we too have auxiliary police forces: PCSOs, Tax Officers, Customs Officers, TV License Officers...All have the power to literally ruin you. That is the state before the individual. Just like the Commies and Nazis, we even have a state sponsored broadcasting company of which we find is full of paedos?

    EDL, BNP and all the others are left wing. Read their stuff, it smacks of old Labour of the 50s.

    Today's Tory party is left of centre but to the right of Milliband's Labour. Cleggy and Cameron agree on a lot of things. They are the SDP reincarnate - the acceptable face of Socialism.

    Yes, I suppose UKIP's ultra-nationalism and xenophobia is more like that exhibited by today's right-wing US Americans. I certainly get the impression that UKIP's vision of the UK is that of a mini-USA.

  5. I dont know what proportion are EU immigrants, have i ever made a claim i know what proportion.

    Now go on google you leftwing fool and find the article yourself.

    Do you know its also socially acceptable to smack Guardian readers in the mouth should you see one?

    You claimed that much of Charalambous's income came from EU migrant tenants, but you're obviously unable to substantiate that claim. You were talking crap, weren't you? As you usually do.

    BTW, dishing out insults and playing the internet hard-man just makes you look a fool.

  6. Farage has been highlighting a lot the people in "in-work" benefits, and thus making the other parties very slowly start to admit to the billions that are being paid in tax credits that are not included in benefits figures, so I guess that is useful for economic transparency and the illusion of the recovery.

    9 out of 10 new claims for housing benefit in Outer London are for people needing rent subsidy due to low income was claimed by a think tank, London Councils. They said around 850,000 London households are in receipt of housing benefit, 282,000 of them in private rented accommodation.

    Low paid immigrant workers, be they EU or non-EU people on allowed visas working in healthcare for instance are likely to have a lot of "in-work" benefits - tax credits, child tax credits, housing, child benefit - it must be highly likely that Charambulou's tenants number many getting some part of their rent paid on housing benefit as well as other in-work benefits, probably far more than those who are 100% unemployed.

    Today I have heard Farage on the radio saying he would not allow immigrants access to these benefits for 5 years. Charambulou has done the maths perhaps that enough of his tenants have been here over 5 years so his gravy train won't stop.

    Meanwhile, I wonder what would happen if immigrants could not access in work benefits. Surely they would not be able to afford to live in London unless rents dropped significantly.

    I don't deny that most of those receiving housing benefit in London are likely to be in work, nor do I dispute the unfairness of the system that is making Charambulou rich. I totally agree tha housing benefit needs a major rethink.

    My dispute was with Corruption's unsubstantiated claim that a large proportion of these claimants are EU migrants. As far as I can see, there is no evidence that that is so.

  7. Please remind me again how wanting to see immigration substantially reduced, or us out of the EU, is "xenophobic"?

    Are Australia, with their tight immigration policy and non-membership of the EU, xenophobic?

    What tight immigration policy? Australia currently has over twice the net migration rate per 1,000 population (5.74) than that of the UK (2.56). As does Canada (5.66). So no, I wouldn't call them xenophobic at all.

  8. Not at all. "Corruption" made a specific claim that many of Charalambous's tenants are EU immigrants on benefits, but has thus far failed to back this up with any concrete evidence. This leads me to suspect that he is simply making it up as he goes along.

    The comparison with Hitler was not mine. I merely pointed out that past experience has shown us that the election of nationalistic, xenophobic leaders by European countries (take your pick) does not usually lead to a happy outcome for that country.

  9. Its something that he said Juliet Bravo, in your beloved Daily Mirror, is that enough evidence?

    He gets best part of a million pound given to him by Haringey Council, will you be upset if i tell claim its an area that has a high proportion of non indigenous folk that are on benefits?

    That's not evidence. Let's see some links or figures, just so we know you're not talking crap. What proportion of Charalambous's tenants are EU immigrants on benefits?

  10. The reason they dont like him is because he complains about immigrants getting social security benefits whilst raking in a million or thereabouts in housing benefit much of which comes from EU immigrants getting benefits.

    What evidence do you have to indicate that much of the housing benefit paid out goes to EU immigrants? Or to indicate that many of Andrew Charalambous's tenants are EU immigrants on benefits (as gf3 appears to have interpreted your slightly ambiguous post)?

  11. Indeed. There's a lot wrong with our political leaders (and imho their quality has consistently fallen over the past 40 years or so), but it's easy to forget that for all their faults, we could actually do a lot worse. That doesn;'t mean accepting the status quo unquestioningly, but trying something , anything, different because they "couldn't do any worse" is asking for trouble imho.

    Exactly, though I'm not sure I'd agree that the quality of politicians has actually fallen over the past 40 years. I reckon they were just as bad, if not worse, then; it's just that we never got to hear about a lot of the underhand goings-on in those days (when it was much easier to keep a secret).

    Things are, indeed, a long way from perfect in the UK, especially in relation to housing. But there is plenty of scope for making our situation a lot worse if we make the wrong choices for the future.

  12. Just a couple of points.

    The FDP (business-friendly liberals) were already on the way out before AfD (anti-euro) came on the scene; the FDP's vote has largely been absorbed by the CDU (Merkel's centre right) and their fall has little to do with the AfD.

    The AfD wins have all been in the east of Germany, with most of their votes coming from the CDU, die Linke (ex-communist hard left) and far-right nationalist parties. I doubt that they'll do anywhere near as well in the western states, but it'll be interesting to see. WIth such a heterogenous supporter base, another question is whether the party can hold itself together in the long term.

  13. IIRC, credit card providers are legally obliged to offer a facility for paying off the entire borrowed sum by monthly direct debit so as to avoid incurring interest charges. You have to ask, though, since they naturally tend to keep quiet about this!

    Like all good HPCers, I also take full advantage of this facility. It really is a no-brainer.

  14. Dunno about that. Increasing the tax threshold and a flat tax would actually make working pay again. Marginal tax rates on working are ridiculous. perhaps Farage gets that? I'm not sure.

    The main contribution to high marginal tax rates comes from the 41% withdrawal rate of tax credits. My marginal tax rate, for example, is 70% (41% tax credit withdrawal + 9% NI + 20% income tax). A flat tax would be unlikely to fix this. A better solution would be to stop means testing text credits and call them a citizen's income.

  15. National grid has activated an emergency plan to seek extra electricity from power station operators over the Winter period.

    NG is now investigating a program of paying customers to reduce energy consumption over Winter in order to try to avoid blackouts.


    Clearly, this was completely unexpected, and nothing to do with shutting down multiple power stations and blocking planning permission for construction of new ones.

    That's coal and nuclear for you - inherently unreliable.

  16. I honestly just don't get the utterly, to me, alien mindset which thinks nothing of treating people like cattle, to be herded this way and that by their betters.

    I'm managed when I'm at work, and that's as far as I'd like it to go.

    Oh, get a grip. Regulating the power of vacuum cleaners in order to reduce energy consumption and hence reduce environmental impact is hardly "treating people like cattle". Your statement really epitomises the image of the spoilt westerner whinging about minor alterations to their lifestyle.as through they were being forced to walk over coals.

  17. I didn't see your post earlier. You may, or may not be correct. But you are just assuming it be so based on your application of common sense. But it's a very significant decision affecting hundreds of millions of people and billions of pounds/euros of purchases. Isn't it worth spending a few tens of thousands of pounds (probably less than one mep's annual expenses) to have some proper studies done? Don't the assessments done by "Which" carry any weight? Can't we have decisions based on actual studies rather than on the assumptions of unqualifed amateurs under the influence of lobbying.

    Just to give a counter-example to your observation. It's possible to conceive a a vacuum with a motor so weak, say 10w that it doesn't pick up dust at all, so increasing the power to 100w, to the point it actually started working, would be an infinite increase in efficiency. I don't know all the factors that are necessary to consider, and I assume you don't either, and I assume the eu parlamentarians certainly don't know.

    They don't just do this sort of thing on a whim to annoy Daily Mail and Telegraph readers. Of course they have proper studies done beforehand:

  18. Been clinging onto that hope, but everything is fading. Restore health of main banks... bring in more HPI forever punters.... allow full-scale hpc... but with FLS/HTB/price-guarantees and so on.... total attrition.

    Oooohh. Bombarded daily with such market VI protectionist thinkings involving being bailed out by other people, that it's a shock when reading a concisely capitalistic and logical position.

    It's a concisely capitalistic and logical position that, in a democratic society, would probably result in very few new roads or railways ever being built. It already results in few new houses being built and, consequently, high house prices.

  19. If people want asset price insurance, let them go and buy it in the marketplace. It's not the job of people who don't own assets to protect the wealth of people who do via compulsory taxation.

    That sounds reasonable, but you're obviously still going to have problems with the uninsured when it comes to construction time. I think I'm inclined to agree with you though. What we need, then, is a government that has the balls to say, "Ok, no more compensation. Buy insurance if you're worried about new roads / rail / housing" and is prepared to enforce construction whereever necessary. Can't see it happening, myself.

    Edit: Thinking about it a bit more, though, I'm not so sure. It'd be a massively confrontational approach leaving a lot of people feeling very hard done by, and we'd probably end up in a situation where no more roads, railways or houses are built due to politicians fearing the boot. I think the carrot approach used in Germany, where the whole community is rewarded for allowing development (of housing), has got to be better.

  20. Of course. It's called property rights, or more specifically in this case the lack of property rights. If someone wants to build an oil refinery in my back garden then I can either deny them the right, or ask for financial compensation by selling them the land. If someone wants to build an oil refinery at the bottom of my garden, then unless I have the means to outbid them and buy the land for myself, I can't do anything to stop them. NIMBY's are effectively exercising ownership over land that they haven't paid for.

    Actually, thinking about it more, NIMBY's are exercising ownership over land that other people have paid for. A government compensation scheme would involve an additional cost on top as the government gets it's money through tax/extortion/theft, whatever you want to call it.

    While removing compensation for nearby roads or railways would reduce the cost of such projects, it would make them extremely difficult to build due to the massive public opposition that would then arise. You'd need a very authoritarian government to push such projects through.

    Looking from the other direction, you'd imagine that compensating property owners for nearby housing developments would make it much easier to realise such projects and would result in more houses being built and thus lower house prices. Mr and Mrs Nimby might get £10k in cash, but they'd see £50k knocked off their property value, partly due to "blight" but mostly due to increased supply of housing). What's not to like?

  • 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.