Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About cjc

  • Rank
    HPC Poster

Profile Information

  • Location
  1. Sadly I agree - as crazy as the current prices are I think in a few years when a litre of petrol costs a tenner, £500 odd k for this house will seem like a steal.
  2. Just looked at a large 3 bed in good but not great part of Hove on for £550k. Wife looked at it the day it went on market - Tuesday. Phoned agent to make offer and there are now 4 offers, in under a week of marketing and they are doing no more viewings and going to best and final offers. Agent said he has never been do busy. I think prices are going to go up and up until something major happens - it seems gov action is ''working' well in Hove. ;0(
  3. I probably agree with you in thinking the state is too big in UK. However I do not think a smaller state would necessarily improve the effort / reward ratio for the average person. I think the 'lucky' people as described before would get to be even richer and the average person would probably have a lower standard of living overall, assuming less redistribution. I think there is lots of stuff only the state can and should do (police, defence, roads, justice, some education, some health etc but there are plenty of areas where the state has no business being and I would suggest that giving so
  4. I totally agree that equity and equality are not the same thing, however I do not agree with your assumption that hard work equals prosperity. I think it would be very difficult to demonstrate any relationship between effort and reward in UK. I would guess that modt people doing long hours and mulitple jobs would be some of the poorest. I would argue that luck (principly of birth and circumstance) and innate ability / talent seem to be far more important to earning potential than hard work. I think capitalism works (and in some way is fairest) in new economies like the USA or Hong Kong years
  5. You make it sound like any country in a financial mess now or in the past planned to get into that situation. Greece did not plan to be were it is today any more than the UK did in the 1970s. Usually the mess occurs when short term decisions catch up with the longer term. I do not 'know' what is going to happen in the future but I actually think inflation (prices and wages) is very likely more likely than the still entirely possible but IMO improbably deflationary outcome.
  6. First point: Agreed in the short term - and I did say my forward analysis was derived from looking backwards with the usual caveat. However, over a longer period say a 25 mortgage term, I would bet the farm that there will be wage inflation. As said with all the money printing I would bet on wage inflation in the not too distant. People have taken cuts and freezes on the understanding that better times are to come. Anecdotally, I know of places that have made cuts, freezes over last few years but are now giving quite healthy rises - cut staff numbers / overheads and now need to raise wages fo
  7. At the macro level IO does increase demand and push up prices so for many this would be seen as negative for society as a whole (others love rising house prices) but historically, certainly over most of the last 50 odd years they made perfect sense for the individual: Had I of bought an average house 25 years ago it cost £45k, or 30 years ago £26k. Why should I have had 25 or 30 years of substantially reduced standard of living with a repayment loan when I could have gone IO and only be left with an amount that many people now have a as credit card debt? If you also factor in that many people
  8. I do not see this as some absolute moral imperative, I do not think the government should criminalise under occupation of housing. I just think that as a guiding principle, under occupation should be seen as undesirable and it should be discouraged. To be fair, in pretty much the way it is now happening, people are not being thrown out of council houses by the police nor are they being fined £1000s a week, they are just not being given £20 odd pounds a week by their fellow tax paying citizens. Also in the private sector many of the tax breaks for under occupation are being removed and instead
  9. OMG - looks like Eastenders is wading in on the debate. Amazed how overtly political the Dot eviction story was in the last episode! I recon BBC should get a big slap or at least have to have an episode where it has to focus on a family of 4 that is 'forced' to live in a B and B so Dot can live alone in a three bedroom house. The most annoying part of the story line is that she is largely in trouble for renting out the spare rooms - this should be encouraged and not punished!
  10. Council are beginning to remove discounts for single / second homes for council tax and are now looking to go over 100% for empty property. I think more tax for under occupation is the direction of travel in the private sector and I don't think it will result in much protest. As has been pointed out in the press the amount a tenant loses in benefits can be more than made up for by renting out the spare room. As I said before, if a council does not have enough one and two bed places then in the longer term they can convert or sell the larger properties and get more small ones. But the first
  11. What makes me laugh in the wages debate is the way that financial / city 'experts' bang on about the need for places like Greece and us in the UK to be more competitive and that workers need 'competitive wages. Then in the next breath these invariably blokes often with red braces and limited intellect and education go on to stress how the city must be able to pay as much as possible to attract and retain the brightest and best. Suddenly the rules of competition do not apply to them and their chums?? I would have thought that if the average banker in UK was 40 odd % less than one in NYC or HK
  12. Re where will they go. Just an idea but once vacated, big houses could be converted to flats or whatever the need is. Or could be sold off at full market rather than discounted right to buy prices and then councils could buy appropriate stock or heaven forbid actually built new homes. For the displaced people - maybe they could sort themselves out within the private sector or if unable they could go into B and Bs which are far more suitable for singles and couples compared to families. Not an instant solution I know but IMO a bit of longer term thinking would not go amiss.
  13. I find it incredible that there is a debate in this country as to whether it is right or fair to expect council tenants to vacate larger properties when they no longer need them.. How anyone can think that having one person in say a 5 bedroom house is right when families are waiting on lists and living in hostels or B &Bs is totally beyond me. I think is really shows just how stupid we are in this country about housing. I think policies don't go nearly far enough and that they should be extended to the private sector. If anyone under utilises this scarce resource they should be heavily
  14. If you have to pay extra for unfurnished then surely everyone will just put in some cheap funiture??
  • 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.