LiveinHope

I think you are right about restructuring and redundancies. However, I do think that many Universities, especially the post 1992, are in financial difficulty. The management across much of the University sector was unskilled in coping with the rapid expansion and the changes in the late 90s, especially with respect to a University as a 'business'. After all, many individuals in this country cannot even manage their household budget. A Google and look around University financial statements reveals horrors like this:

Started with the 50% target for going to University in my opinion, which, as has been stated on here before, could be read as a cynical ploy to get many young to take a loan to pay their own unemployment benefits for 3 years.

I work with a few in the US at a number of institutions and I am not aware of a similar situation to the UK. In my opinion, University in the UK was turned into a factory production line and spoiled.

I think its more the reluctance to take a gamble with public money than subservient. If you are employed you cannot run off with the grant money as it belongs to the Institution. So the person who authorised you to have the grant can't be left with some explaining to do to their superiors, who won't have any explaining to do to their superiors etc. Lack of balls. Yes, it's public money, but with research you have to be prepared to take a risk. The avoidance of risk also means that too much institutionalised research is too safe, which is a waste of public money. Innovative science will soon be done by independently funded scientists outside the 'system', full circle back to 1660.

Doesn't look good for at least one of the post 1992 that is not perceived as one of the weaker ones

The outlook is poor even if you are a research superstar. Unfortunately, it can be a bit like boiling a frog. Many would have a better life as an independent scientist hiring facilities; overheads would certainly be cheaper. However, a problem is the Research Councils that require you to be employed to hold a grant as PI, which is a daft regulation.

"Properties not available in my area yet", so it suggested some properties in a postcode nearby, helpfully. Courtesy of AA route finder it turns out to require a one way commute of 316.1 miles or 5 hrs 08 mins

I expect the average house price to fall back to 2003 prices around 2018-2020. About a 40% fall from the peak. I might be wrong. If prices do as I anticipate, I may or may not buy. It will still depend upon what is the best strategy at the time.

I want to devise a way to get everyone at my place of work to send me an e-mail. I have a suspicion that the number of people who put "Director of" or "Manager of" in their signature most likely exceeds the number of people left to direct or manage.

Exterior looks like it's covered in razor wire - Keep Out Interior looks totally sterile, as if you could be in suspended animation on a trip to another planet

Eh ? Surely the two are connected? A house is just somewhere to live that ties up money that can also be used for living. So, ultimately, the decision comes down to what value I place upon owning a particular house compared to other uses the same money can be put towards.

Funnily enough, I just had an e-mail from an Estate agent as I am on various lists for office space to rent Their e-mail nickname was Joe Bloggs BSc (Hons) FFS who feels the need to put BSc (Hons) after their name? I've never bothered to use it, or my higher qualifications, and it's relevant for my profession. Is it willy waving ? If so, and to quote Shania Twain, It don't impress me much.

Dodgyness is only really uncovered once you have bought and the dump is yours. So I wouldn't waste too much time previewing. Better things to do with life. I've said before that if I was going to stump up the amount of cash a house commands I'd want to test drive it first - live in it for a week. Especially if it was semi-detached or had near neighbours. I appreciate that is unlikely to happen !

Similar, was never in the right place at the right time with regard to UK property. Of course, I could have bought for 8-10 x salary like some of my contemporaries, but that just turned them into employee slaves petrified of saying boo to a goose. Of course, I'm viewed as the enemy. In hindsight, I'm doubly grateful as I have no emotional ties to bricks and mortar, or to possessions, and I've never paid for a loan. The market is still not at a point where I would bother to look given the money I have at my disposal.

Ahh, the real economy

1994 - when I nearly bought a repossession, but then I went abroad for work. so, nearly 20 years ago, if you exclude when I viewed a Taylor Wimpey showhome last year, but that was just for incredulity.

From my sector, many organisations are financially in a very tight spot and shedding staff. The higher paid 'decision maker's' remain generally, while the lower paid 'productive workers' reduce in number, usually. For those organisations, the average salary increases.

At this rate, I may become a first time buyer at age 60 (if it makes economic sense)

Oh well, oversupply of rental, cheaper rents then.

I think that many 'cash rich' people with hard cash are probably staying out of the market waiting for value to return, and they are unlikely to spunk their cash up the wall - bit to savvy for that I suspect. Unlike people who are rich through unearned cash windfalls and who seem willing to turn their cash rich position to cash poor by buying a house today. They will soon run out of money. Not long to wait now.

I'd recommend a secondhand vintage ring for value, but to the point It started to go wrong with the arrival of 'plastic' and people no longer paying for something with cash from their wallet. I think people lost the connection with money, and money and amounts of money become 'fictitious'. Now, 'borrowing to own now' versus 'saving to own tomorrow', is ingrained and tye connection between 'having' and 'value' is lost, so credit can inflate.

As a percentage of the market, I suspect that in times gone by houses to own were more plentiful and cheaper to buy. Good or bad is a matter of opinion. Some people who chose to accumulate properties by leverage assisted by the banks, and who then sit on their backsides while i) other people work to pay their debts and, ii) actions of others like them borrow like there is no tomorrow to drive up prices, have distorted the market. Good or bad is a matter of opinion. I would be very happy to see swathes of empty rental properties because people who wanted to own a home could afford to do so without large debts. Although knowing how things go, there would probably be a scrappage demolition scheme to help distort the market if homes were too plentiful. There, cars and houses combined.

What amuses me most is the Taylor Wimpey New build estate near me. Back in 'the day' Wimpey homes were for lower middle-class, Austin Allegro or Austin Maxi owners. The new £500K Taylor Wimpey homes predominantly have Mercs or BMWs parked on the drive. The cars are parked on the drive because they are too wide to fit into the garages, which appear to hark back to Taylor Wimpey's roots I expect that, like the houses, someone else owns the cars.

This post sets my mind spinning

I was asked to give a free talk in my time at a NT visitor centre. For the talk, I wanted a particular photograph of the area I visited a few days before to take the picture. I was asked to pay £5.00 to park. I was going to be about 20 minutes. I explained to the twerp in the box what I was doing, why I was doing it, and how long I might be. I was told that if I wished, I could return 2 hours later after 3.00pm when the parking charge would only be £3.00. I left and illustrated my talk with the above story.