efdemin
-
Posts
1,413 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by efdemin
-
-
You have a choice as to which pension provider and pension product you use...
Aye, a Hobson's choice at best.
Most employers will arrange a stakeholder pension based on one provider's platform, limiting you to the funds that they provide. This is often a small subset of the funds they provide to a SIPP customer.
If you are lucky your employer will allow you to pay into a SIPP but are they less likely to pay the extra employer's contribution in that case? Without the employer's contribution saving for a pension is only a borderline positive benefit.
Even passive tracker-type funds have fees of 0.5% per year - compounds to a big % of the overall value over your working life! (And that's often on top of the margin they make on the buy/sell spread.)
Choosing a fund to invest in is like trying to choose the least shitty stick in a shitty stick shop.
-
bet the leccy bill is less than the chief execs salary...
savings should be top down
Yeah, but it's more noticeable to the public. Distracts them from the real waste in the council.
-
One two-bed, one three-bed?
Heh. Didn't look at that level of detail.
Bolux. Place I lived there was very much in that league (it's a poor area). Next door was a big Asian family all packed into a tiny house. Go back to the post-war era and those places would be a dream for a working-class family.
(though it was a much nicer place to live than the places I suffered in London. Partly due to a landlord I got on with, partly to a much better feel to the area - pubs one could go into without feeling threatened, etc, and it had working hot water).
In summary, they are FTB homes!
Two things: One, the prices of these house are out of the reach of a modern-day 'working-class family', especially as FTB's. Two, they're also a stretch for someone on a decent graduate salary (after student loan repayments and the rest). They'd be better off renting and saving up to get a better house when they want to settle down.
When you lived there, did you have family in tow or were you single(ish) and living a life of lots of going out on the town etc.? They're fine for that, but not much use for a family. Unless you personally would like to raise a family in the same manner as that Asian family you used to live next to?
-
Nearest: two houses in St.Nicholas Road, both at £80k.
Next: Carlyle Road, £80k.
Next: Fishponds Road, £95k.
Next: two in Boswell Street, £79-85k.
... etc.
That's asking prices. Didn't check sold prices.
That's just the map view on zoopla. Typed in Bristol, clicked map view, then zoomed in on that area.
The message seems to be, if you want to buy in Bristol on average pay then you can buy! As an antidote to the barmy idea from the nutjob wing of HPC that average pay and a modest deposit should get you straight in to the kind of house that carries a £210k asking price in Bristol.
The two in St Nicholas Park seem to be the same one by two agents, based on the main photo.
The one in Carlyle road is an auction 'in need of refurbishment' i.e. it is a shit heap that needs work to make it habitable.
The ones on Boswell street are both one-bed flats in a converted terrace.
None of these are average properties or even liveable for a family. They are the bottom of the barrel. And even then you will need £8,000-£16,000 to put down as a deposit which will take how long to save on a low wage?
The fact that you would have to consider houses as poor as this as 'affordable' shows how much the market in Bristol still needs to move down.
-
"americano" is Italian for an Instant Coffee! Is that another Italian word we've adopted but messed up in translation?
As for Brisl, I just took a look on zoopla around where I used to live[1]. Thought Brisl had become expensive, so I was surprised to see 2- and 3-bed houses for just £80k, and nothing over £90k in the immediate neighbourhood. Looks pretty affordable to me!
[1] A couple of minutes walk from Stapleton Road station.
I don't quite believe this. I just did a search around Stapleton Road station, 2/3 beds, 'this area only' and this was the only one under £100k: http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-20627310.html. Most stuff in Easton looks to be £120k+.
If by 'nearby' the houses you found were in Saint Pauls, then well, you do know that's where there was rioting this summer? I presume the local schools will be really bad if they share their intake with Saint Pauls as well.
Edit: I thought Americano was a watered down expresso rather than instant. Although I guess in Italy watering down a good expresso is a similar crime to drinking instant so it's the same really.
-
So, what exactly would be harmed, and how, if we weren't in the EU? How did we ever manage before it was invented??
The time is right to exit completely, and set sail without the shackles of all that brussels doesn't have to offer.
How do you define when that time was? Before we joined in the 70's? Before the first EU agreement in 1956(ish)? Of course, before then it gets a bit muddy with two world wars and the dying embers of an empire.
Face it, we only joined [the free trade agreement] because we weren't doing so well on our own in the first place. Why would it be any different now?
I voted for the second option btw. I don't think the majority of people in the UK really like the EU so we may as well make it official and hope to stay in the free trade area.
-
I agree.
I see no problem with us withdrawing from the EU but remaining a member of the EEA / EFTA.
We are net importers from the EU so it is in their interest for us to remain part of the EEA / EFTA.
It is time that trade and governance are treated as two distinct elements of our relationship with Europe.
It is also entirely logical that we begin to negotiate other FTAs with groups such as NAFTA. The time to modernise the Commonwealth and create an official trading bloc has certainly come as well.
Unfortunately I think that time has come and gone. India is well outpacing the UK, Australia trades more with China and other non-European countries, Canada has both natural resources and a tech base (that they have built up via subsidies) that are bigger than the UK, so why would they want to get into a poxy trade agreement with their declining ex-imperial master?
America clearly doesn't think of us as a special partner anymore, China would cut our throats for a few pennies (if they are not already doing this by outsourcing). Brazil / South America - will they want or need to trade with us or would they tend to trade with NAFTA & China / India?
So realistically, the only natural allies are the ones we are closest to geographically. And we've just given them the finger. It was probably the right thing to do given the pressure tactics used in the negotiations but the long-term consequences are not clear.
-
Europe already has enough tax havens.
Whether rich want to move their money from Gibraltar or Cyprus or Monaco or Switzerland to the UK and bear all the political risks is debatable. Not so long ago the top tax rate in this country was 95% and it is rising again (recently from 40% to 50%).
That's income tax the really rich don't get their money from earned income but more from leasing/letting long-term assets like houses or shops or basically just land of any description. In that sense the UK is still a low-tax environment (max ~£3,000 council tax on a multi-million house - bargain! It would cost more to moor up a super-yacht in Monaco for a few weeks).
-
If you read what the FT article here says I think you will find what SF said about some regulation being tougher is correct. Neither she or the FT is a particular fan of Cameron so I see no reason for them to twist it his way.
It was reported on the BBC so it obviously must be false in some way.
-
The only thing that's facetious is the original statement made by David Mitchell.
I think he may have been exaggerating for comic effect. He is, after all, a comic writer/actor who also writes opinion pieces.
-
Having listened to him on the 10 O'Clock show and watching his other appearances, I'd say it was more of an accuarate description.
And believe me, this site isn't short of facetious arguments...
Exactly, and your original post was just adding to it.
I don't know how or why you would think he would put the Great Depression down as "just being numbers" based on his appearances on some panel shows though. It sounds more like your own prejudice really with nothing else to back it up and therefore it's pointless.
-
Do you really think he'd get a reply?
No, but the point is he's putting words into someone's mouth to back up a facetious argument, yes?
-
Where did you get that nonsense from?
Actually Switzerland has noticeably more industry than the UK and about the same as Germany:
Switzerland GDP - composition by sector:
agriculture: 1.3%
industry: 27.2%
services: 71.5% (2010 est.)
UK GDP - composition by sector:
agriculture: 0.7%
industry: 21.7%
services: 77.6% (2010 est.)
Germany GDP - composition by sector:
agriculture: 0.9%
industry: 27.8%
services: 71.3% (2010 est.)
Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html
Maybe they should have said export-led industry... GDP is not the same as external trade. I would bet a lot that a large % of the uk 'industry' is actually the defense sector making stuff for the MOD, so not really a +ve balance on trade at all. Oh, and another large % will be the north sea oil & gas, which is declining anyway.
Please think a bit more before posting plain statistics.
-
Great. More 6th form politics from another right-on privileged socialist. I suppose he'd say the stock market crash of 1929 that caused the Great Depression was also a case of "just being numbers".
I don't think he would but maybe you should ask him what he thinks first, out of common courtesy if nothing else, before putting words in his mouth?
-
It's a battle between the forces of good and evil.
The EU don't want to be controlled by banks but Cameron does. The EU want financial regulation.
As to a downside it depends what you think is good for you, debt, printing money and inflation or living within your means. You can only do the printing if everyone does it, the EU are trying to fight it off.
If the EU pulls it off, tells the banks to **** off and can run balanced budgets, the UK's business model is toast. Where do you think international money will flow? Into the EU with a stable currency or into the debt crazed UK that can devalue their investment? It would mean printing money is off the table for the UK and we are going to have proper cuts and house prices are toast because interest rates would soar when we had the run on the pound that made us change. At that point we would run to join the Euro.
Of course between now and then the forces of evil are going to try unleash hell as they try to get the EU to make the ECB lender of last resort.
Don't be foolish, the EU zone countries will still run up debts the same as before, it'll just be hidden more carefully. Greece is simply an apertif - the books all looked ok until they weren't and then it all fell down.
-
Right decision, possibly the wrong reason but who knows?
Sarkozy might have insisted on those conditions on purpose either because he wanted the UK out of this, or there was already a behind the scenes agreement and this way both Cameron and Sarkozy can look good in their own country whilst the Euro can carry on and do whatever to save itself.
Completely ridiculous situation though - trying to push through more EU integration under the pressure of a Euro crisis.
-
Erm ... Amazon?
Amazon is a rather good example of taking Android in its own direction. That direction being an Apple-like close integration with its own store.
Yes, but they are not a device manufacturer. They make money off of the services on the device so it is in their interest to make those services the best they can, hence they can justify investing in a customised Android environment. Motorola/HTC/Samsung don't have any services so there is no value in it for them unless someone else pays them to do it.
Besides, the Amazon Fire is very much a consumer device and not a locked-down enterprise friendly device. Can it be wiped/disabled/audited remotely? How fine-grained is the control over data usage? How secure is the browser? Have the known security issues in the base Android OS (buffer overflows and the like) been fixed? The answer to those is probably 'no' or 'the same as basic Android'.
-
I pretty much always buy the same car and the same model had gone up 20% between 2007 and 2010 and couldn't chip the price down much anywhere only usual 'we'll throw in some mats etc.'.
Yes, and how much has Sterling devalued in that time period?
The cost of raw materials and the design and manufacture has gone up in £'s, hence it is the major part of the list price increase. How much, as a %, has food gone up in that period?
Give thanks to Merv for his wonderful printy printy.
Edit: Don't forget the higher VAT (17.5% vs. 20%, and for a short time, 15%) either.
-
Fox news trying to pass off Greek protest videos as coming from Moscow:
http://rt.com/news/fox-moscow-fake-riots-281/
Phone boxes wrong, greek bank signs on the wall and protestors wearing jeans and T-shirts in the Moscow winter!
NOT Russia or Moscow.
B-b-b-but I thought it was the place of the BBC to mislead the sheeple with inaccurate news!
-
Its funny that everyone here says that Android is insecure but without any backup at all.
Its as insecure as you want it to be. If you install non market apps then you get agg. But then that makes Windows just as insecure.
And therein lies the problem - the Android market will tend to the lowest common denominator, which is a less secure phone.
Android will pick up the blackberry market if it just offers keyboards.
Big if! It seems Google are more interested in the tablet market and there is f-all interest in an Android phone with a keyboard. HTC have tried it, Motorola have tried it. Both were ok as it happens but both were nothing more than niche products.
I just suspect there will be a battened down version for the enterprise.
No, there won't. Too costly to implement correctly. The device makers want to spend as little as possible on the software so why would they spend more on security? Only companies with a closed system that they can take more of the profit from (Blackberry
, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon (see the Fire)) will have a viable business case for investing loads in security. Google's actions show they could care less about an individuals' personal information, what makes you think they care any more about a single company?Android is great but it's not the best or only solution.
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15551818
In general, I do try to shop 'patriotically', especially with food.
I'm in the process of choosing a new company car. I've had a quick Google, thinking I would be able to find a site that lists all cars currently manufactured in the UK but, to my surprise, I can't find one. Thisis the nearest but it's already out of date and doesn't list each individual model. I know that the brands are all foreign but I'd like to take British employment into account when I choose. I have a feeling other people might refer to such a list too. Among the mass-market choices I believe are made in the UK are:-
All Land Rover and Range Rover
Nissan Micra
Nissan Cashcow (how do you spell that again??)
Honda Civic
Vauxhall Astra
Jaguars (OK borderline mass-market)
Can anyone expand on this?
Nissan Leaf
Mini (all models and variants?)
MG 6
Aston Martin
Bentley
Rolls-Royce
McClaren MP4-12C
Lotus
If you took it wider to R&D then plenty of firms have design studios in the UK - I think Ford design the focus and fiesta here? Plus they still have a vast network of garages that employ hundreds for maintenance and repairs.
I spent one summer in a place that makes airbags for a lot of cars on the market and I think there are plenty of other companies who make components that eventually go into cars made elsewhere. So for logistical reasons a lot of cars made in mainland Europe will have some UK made parts in. Not so much German or French marques though, obviously.
-
Maybe the recent strikes highlighted how worse off they are overall compared to the public sector and so they're holding out for more? Law of unintended consequences etc.
-
Come again??? Where is there deflation in the supermarkets? The portions are getting smaller, the prices are rising, some of the offers are psychological ploys that cost the shopper more.
Also see Panorama tonight about supermarket price wars being not what they seem
Definitely, but I think the supermarkets (alright, just the Tesco I usually go to) have found the upper limit on what people can pay. Prices on certain things are cheaper now than they were 6 months ago. Not cheaper than 12-24 months ago mind, but still every little helps.
It may just be a ruse to lure people in over Christmas though, I guess I'll have to see what happens in the new year.
-
Simple, if in doubt avoid.
In reality not always possible, especially in sought after areas. Doesn't have to mean London; anywhere where there is a nice school or handy commuting to a big city suffers from this.
False, as a tenant you get bailed out too if you lose your job (housing benefit).
Not before you've been kicked out, lost your deposit and had to find housing at the last minute until the council can sort out the paperwork. Not to mention it's a black mark if people check previous references. And of course the much smaller market available due to the 'no HB tenants' landlords.
Until tenants' rights are improved renting is not as secure as owning/mortgaging your own house, simple as. It can be cheaper, more convenient, etc. etc. but it depends on your own personal circumstances.
Car Premiums Artificially High, Admits Insurer
in House prices and the economy
Posted
What I would suggest is a statutory third party insurance that is regulated by the government. This would be priced to cover injury claims, damage claims, etc. but no extra markup. It would make sense to put all these monies into a single pot as well to cut down on admin. But it should in no way be taken directly by the government as direct taxation.
Then fire & theft, comprehensive etc. could be left as a market as it currently is (more or less).
Then hopefully a young driver has a better choice than choosing to pay more than their car is worth in insurance each year or driving uninsured and all the fallout from that if they harm a third party.
I think it is done this way in Australia, or something similar. I don't know if other countries do it or if they have more regulation than our market anyway.