Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mightytharg

  1. Surely the reason people are screaming about the mansion tax is that is so completely unfair as to be backwards. Income tax: Northerners (through misfortune or laziness) earn less than Southerners, so they have less money to spend and pay less tax. This seems at least a little bit fair. Mansion tax: Southerners (through misfortune or because they are nicer neighbours) pay more for housing than Northerners, so they have less money to spend and pay more tax. This seems ludicrous. Without using naked self-interest as an argument, can any of you Commies explain how a mansion tax could possibly be a good thing? Surely it would be fairer to levy a tax on people who had large cheap houses instead of heaping more pain on those who have already suffered from high prices?
  2. Inevitable really. Water company has a choice: a) Provide water, but this costs money. Declare a drought and spend the money on big cigars and champagne instead.
  3. Where did you get that idea? The United States is a republic and yet journalists who criticise Obama or clerics he disagrees with are hunted down and killed (sometimes their families too). Zimbabwe is a republic. Where are these free republics you mention?
  4. 1. They don't. The people with more properties pay extra council tax. 2. Because CGT is paid after corporation tax has already been paid, so it would be unfair to have to pay full income tax as well. People paid via company dividends often pay a higher total tax than employees since Corporation Tax + Capital Gains + VAT > Income Tax + NI (Buy-to-Letters tend to pay little or no income tax or CGT so this could be considered a bit unfair)
  5. OK a test for you. Think really hard. Having to perform indentured labour for a whole year, just for permission from some bureaucrat to move house when you change jobs. Can you imagine something about this that might be wrong? Think really hard.
  6. What can we do to stop evil organisations like the National Trust and RSPB gobbling up more and more land? It seems they pay no tax and get tons of handouts (both forced and via begging). Compare this to an individual who actually wants to use the land to live in who has to pay circa 60% tax and then death duties when they die. No wonder we're left renting slaveboxes while these scummers get richer and richer. Should we campaign or write to our MPs? Although obviously a good thing to destroy/hobble these organisations, it would be a hard sell in the media since it's for Charidee.
  7. It should be good for the rest of us as our Council Tax goes down, and much fairer. Shifting poor scroungers out of the center of London is another benefit. Good for the environment too as commuting distances decrease. It's strange that anyone would attempt to criticise an obviously good policy like this.
  8. Also the £6000 goes to some disgusting trade unionist if you commute, but if you live in London you get the £105,000 (ymmv) back when you sell the house,
  9. Greece just passed a law saying they can steal the money from private sector pensioners (bondholders) and give it to the public sector (the ECB). All the ISDA has said that passing this law isn't a default in itself, the Greeks would have to use the law for there to be a default. So, you can buy a boatload of credit default swaps and be assured of being paid when the default comes (I'd recommend also buying one bond to be 100% certain).
  10. I don't think the delinquent borrowers should be complaining. Lots of people don't get given tens of thousands of dollars in free money. The sensible option is to repossess the houses and sell them at the market price, it's unfair that the delinquent borrowers would get the protection of bankruptcy but I don't see a way to avoid that.
  11. If everyone is forced to keep their money in the banks, and fractional reserve banking is used to create ten times the money deposited, then the deposits are now only worth a tiny fraction of their original value. So a house now costs £300,000 instead of £100 in your grandfather's time.
  12. This is great news. It's vital that more housing is built and one of the most urgent things that can be done to save the economy. It's just a shame that it's going to be "affordable" housing for scroungers and not sold on the open market.
  13. Actually, the money laundering rules are disgusting and go against all legal principles. It is the only crime you can commit even if you are completely innocent (no Mens Rea). Should it even be a crime to try treat you Iranian customers fairly and protect them from an agressive country who has used this method to steal the natural resources of other sovereign countries like Libya? A fine for not stealing someone's money! Even in normal circumstances the money laundering rules cause great harm. For example, savers would be around ten times better off if they all kept their money in cash instead of being forced by the regulations to hand it over to the banks.
  14. Surely the stamp duty holiday has encouraged more volume at the lower end of the market, so when it ends we can expect a sharp upward movement in the house price indices?
  15. You need to shop around. Even BT will put in a land line for £40 or less.
  16. Why not make the doctors pay this instead of the taxpayer? Those overpaid scroungers can afford their own insurance.
  17. If we want to reduce economic inequality, we can do it easily. Just cut public sector pay. This would make them more equal with the downtrodden private sector. For some reason the Guardian aren't championing this rather obvious solution...
  18. Some of these dreadful austerity cuts have already happened here: People only getting paid for 12 months a year, not 14. People working until they are 63. Doing the washing up instead of smashing everything. It's hard to imagine us needing to cut anything, we already live in an austere world compared to the Greeks! (If we did we would see decreasing inequality, an improved economy etc. etc.)
  19. Is it those 3 million scroungers bleeding us dry?
  20. Who is getting shafted? What difference does it make if he's payed £500,000 and pays £100,000 tax instead of being paid £600,000 and paying £200,000 pounds tax? Public sector workers don't really contribute anything in taxes anyway. I'm one of the doers and we use safewords and I respect her limits.
  21. For IR35 to apply he would have to be under the direction and control of an employer. Since he's the chief executive this hardly applies. For his travel expenses, I assume his company is under contract for 729 days instead of the two years mentioned in the article, which would make this fine too. I was too honest to apply for a student loan, but it seems like those who did aren't very grateful.
  22. This is great news. What is it with the public sector and scamming subsidised housing? Pigs, soldiers, nurses, they're all at it. Then the public sector forbids the building of more houses and the private sector suffers.
  23. I'm no theologian, but I believe they'll play American Pie over and over again, or maybe stick pointy things underneath your fingernails.
  24. I agree, invested £45k and now worth £75k. Not bad at all...
  25. Sounds like nonsense to me. At the moment, inflation and ZIRP is encouraging everyone to remove their money from the banks and pour it into buy-to-let. Sustained deflation would give people much more incentive to keep their money in the bank, there would also be fewer defaults since rising costs wouldn't push people over the edge. I know the people who spend all this freshly printed money are keen to persuade you otherwise, but deflation is normal and a good thing.
  • 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.