Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

stu531

Members
  • Content Count

    147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by stu531

  1. This thread hasn't been touched for a while. Harrogate as we know is an oddity. House prices are continuing to go bananas again. In the area there's a dearth of houses on the market, with the odd few that have ironically been on the market for a long time. As in, they either fly, or they stay on for an age. The trend is definitely upwards though. Limited house building in the area due to the massive number of NIMBYs - still. Some developments on Harlow Moor Road and off Skipton Road in the future, but nothing major.
  2. Probably the most sensible, agreeable post I have seen on here in a long time.
  3. Probably the most sensible, agreeable post I have seen on here in a long time.
  4. You lot on here make me laugh. If Brown or Blair had had this work done, you'd have gone up the wall knocking them. Instead, as it's Cameron, it's 'OK' because it needed it, or it's reasonable, or whatever you like. Truth is, you've all been suckered in by the media drip-feeding how bad our finances have been because of a bloated public sector, whilst forgetting it was the banks at fault, and siding with the same pair of Cameron and Osbourne who are back-slipping fat notes to the very bankers that got us into this mess. It's a shame HPC is so tory and doesn't concentrate on what it's supposed to be about - simple home ownership for all. Not 'I'm all right Jack - once I get my hands on a house... and then wait for it to go up in value so I can change my tune'. This very thread shows how tunes have been changed.
  5. OP - great letter. Sums things up very well indeed. This should be the stuff that newspapers are aligning with.
  6. Oh... but of course. Actually the level of debt as a percentage of GDP was a lot lower in 2007 than it was in 1997. It's because of the bank bail out that it went pear shaped since. So... next time someone comes along and says, Labour inherited a healthy economy, OK - they got it even healthier, but the banks went and screwed it all up. Oh yes, and one other thing. Go back to 1997 - go back to massive hospital waiting lists, go back to more crime if you want. Yes - it peaked in 1997, and Gordon was far from perfect. But don't tell me that the coalition will do a better job of it. Growth negative again? Unemployment en masse just around the corner? Have people really forgotten how bad things were under Thatcher? Well, time to wake up... because you'll be remembering it soon.
  7. Nick, I've got to say that your piece is the only worthwhile post I've found on this forum. I'm afraid that most folk tend to vote Tory based upon the garbage they're fed. If most people were too thick and voted labour, how come there are only 2 newspapers in this country that are pro Labour? The rest - and particularly the Sun and the Mail - are uber Tory as well we know. It's the same story about the cuts. 58% of people think they're necessary, only because they *think* they're necessary, not because they have a deep rooted understanding of why cuts are needed. And of course, when those 58% actually become affected by the cuts, they will think again. It's just a shame that those people who read the Sun and vote Tory are probably not those who visit the library, simply because they're used to single line paragraphs and words in bold type that tell you what you should be believing. I think deep down, most people on this forum know that the cuts are idealogical rather than actually necessary. And it's a load of bunkum that the private sector won't suffer because of it. Most of my private sector workmates are as concerned about the cuts as people I know working in the public sector: contract work should come the private sector way, but of course it won't. So don't kid yourself, these cuts haven't trickled through yet. The very people that are will be affected, those with the heads in the sand and merrily saying 'yeah, cuts are needed'... will be the first to kick off once they become directly affected. Be careful what you wish for.
  8. I take your point, but it's an order of magnitude apart. Up until last year I did work in the public sector (private now) and, yes, I could see where there were inefficiencies. But in general people worked hard and were passionate about what they did. I happen to agree that £157k is too much of a salary for a council leader. Saying that, what do you think *is* an acceptable amount? £99k? £50k? It becomes hard to judge. What I would like to see is that *all* organisations - public and private - enforce the German-style maximum salary multiplier between the lowest and highest paid worker. Clearly that sort of fairness doesn't seem to be stifling Germany's economy.
  9. It's *unbelievable*. We here time and again 'we're in this together', 'we were left a mess'. OK, whatever the cliche, just make sure that if you WANT to get your house in order, start by the people (a) who caused the bloody crisis and ( those who can obviously afford it rather than some guy supporting his family on benefit. Have we just swallowed too much propaganda from the Daily M*il, Express, and anything that comes out of Murdoch's ****? *this* is what makes my blood boil, not some half-cocked story about a job title in some council somewhere in Liverpool. Let's get an order of perspective on this. The Banks are the culprits here and deserve to pay, not Joe Bloggs who may be employed by his local council to try generate some local growth.
  10. Err... yes? On account of the mess left in the city over years of neglect, the reduction in trade out of the city and the reluctance of people to invest despite it obviously being a 'pool full of talent'. This thread shows how sad people are that they draw on headlines in the Daily M**l about Cheerleader jobs and such. If a council has 5 or 6 jobs that you don't like the title of, so what? I could name many private companies that have perfectly disagreeable job titles. Ultimately public sector workers (and I'm not one, before you ask - I'm in the private sector) are easy targets at the minute, fed by a diatribe of bizm from the likes of tory rags like the M**l and also Murdoch funded babbage like Sky TV.
  11. Yeah, but that's really crap, though. If having a large rate of unemployment means that inflation is cut down because they can't afford to buy, well - what does that say about what we hope for. Sad really. Much as I would like to see a reduction in house prices it's hardly ethically sound that we wait for unemployment to drive the drop. It's as ethically unsound as the greedy BTLers doing better in life at others' misfortunes. We are no better if we want HPC off the back of high unemployment. GO should be raising money off secondary homes and BTL, simple as that. If the very soul of HPC is to push for a house for all, then hoping for unemployment-driven house deflation will take us further away from that ideal. And ultimately, most - if not all - BTLers will still be able to keep one house if they were taxed on a second.
  12. I don't get what's happening in Harrogate at the minute - that's for sure. The number of houses on the market have dropped - whether that's as people have taken them off the market, or that a number have sold and people aren't putting them back on, I'm not sure. From nearly 800 a couple of months ago (Harrogate/Houses on RM), there are down to 740. Is Harrogate truly immune? I don't think so, but prices do appear to be standing up.
  13. 'Continental Crispness' my ****. It'd be like living in a hospital ward. Sterile, lifeless, austere. And 750k for a 3 bed house. Tsk.
  14. I get so peeved when we're asked to target benefit fraudsters when the real culprits are those in suits. Tax the greedy, not the needy.
  15. Terrific post, and one that I don't understand isn't being mirrored by the great political commentators of the country. Put simply: - The amount we're trying to reduce debt by is peanuts compared to the overall problem - Cuts will hit people hard, without actually doing much good - Therefore the implication is that the reason is ideological, rather than practical - The only real solution is to inflate our way out of it - probably, simultaneously with the States and other countries that are in a similar position - So what's the point in making the cuts?
  16. I think, Kyoto, your suggestions carry a great deal of common sense and have a large amount of merit to them. They do have a lot of ideas that mean that you are looking at motivating people into work, off benefit, to remove tiers that are non-productive, and look to consolidate where feasible. Unfortunately you're overlooking one thing. And that is, that politicians are a bunch of utter twats.
  17. Yep, I suspect this is merely preamble for more QE. Merv isn't buying crisps from the same newsagent as me. They've gone up massively in the last year or so. I'm being denied my Prawn Cocktail and having to resort to 25g multipacks.
  18. OP is correct, and that's echoed by the Rightmove figures. But then you've got the Halifax figures. Is it a great, big, massive Mexican stand off? I suspect that what'll happen is that, in decent areas, you'll get somewhere near asking prices. In others, you'll see a drop of 20-30%. Most of it will come down to how long they've been on the market. It feels like we're going to see the big drops once these houses have been on for a long time: say, after Christmas. That's when the stand-off will come to an end.
  19. The worst thing about all this is the amount of diatribe people have unwittingly swallowed. How many times have you seen TV reporters interviewing people, who say 'yeah, we've spent too much, we need to start cutting'. Yet when they're questioned about health, defence, schools, transport, police - you name it, they suddenly disagree. The problem here is that people just haven't understood the reality of cuts. Now that things are about to become very real, the language will change. Mister Daily Mail will suddenly understand what cuts mean to him, once his bus is no longer free, or there is a rise in crime, or there are yet more 'layabouts' on the streets. Oh and hopefully, if next door's house is on fire, it doesn't completely burn down.
  20. Indeed. I hope there's a level of sanity kept on this forum. People are genuinely worried about jobs. Whatever your view on whether the public sector is too big or not, just remember that real people will be losing their jobs soon. Don't blame them - blame politicians of whichever colour.
  21. It might have been authorized prior to the coalition. Either way, Pickles' ideas will generally stifle supply and cause more public sector spending. Not very well thought out IMHO.
  22. I've heard that too about new builds. When the coalition came to power they swept away the numbers which were effectively quotas for construction work. Now, it's very difficult for councils to get new builds through without evidence based consultation - which costs local authorities more money (ie yet more money to spend on consultancies). Without this consultation, local groups - full of NIMBYs who now have new power - new builds just won't happen. Ergo less supply of houses to the market. Pickles, you tosspot.
  23. Only a little though. So much will depend on how the economy performs in the next few weeks. Unemployment and downturn in general will result in more drops. Until then, sellers will hold tight on big price drops.
  24. I've got 767 on my Harrogate/houses search. It dropped a little over the last fortnight or so but appears to be increasing again. I've noticed a few more SSTC boards of late, but still more new properties coming on the market. Question is - why now in Harrogate and not, say, 8 months ago? I'm still waiting to see if there are any significant drops though. Sellers are usually stubborn - and I bet even more so in Harrogate!
×
×
  • 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.