mightytharg

More like 75. We'll have to work ourselves into the grave before we can retire, just to pay the debts of theses scummy parasites. Don't you watch the news?

Sorry, but I'm not clear on why so many of you think buy to let is a bad thing. Surely the problem is supply, and the lack of that is caused by the Labour party. The buy-to-letters are unlikely to be socialists, so how exactly are they the problem? Just curious, Tharg.

I think you're confusing the screwers with the screwees. Parasite scum.

Actually, the problem was deliberately caused by the government. See http://www.yyur.com/feminism.html for details.

Just in case they don't get back to you with anything useful, I'll answer some of the points in your letter... Probably don't want to keep mentioning this to the communists. I imagine them salivating at all the local income tax they'll get from you Not clear how it helps them? the shopping sprees put them in debt, high prices make it harder for them to upgrade or buy more properties Looks like the problem will resolve itself then... Again, this should resolve itself if the banks don't get paid back... Bingo. You've identified the real problem. Now think about which parties poor people tend to vote for and whether your MP wants them to be able to escape poverty. Also, remember you are not just saving to buy your own house, but the planning regs also force you to buy one for a "key worker" to retire to at 55 years of age. deeply concerns me? who cares? Bankruptcy is so easy they don't have to pay the debts back anyway...

This will just push house prices higher. Now we will need separate houses for ourselves and each of our women. Looks like another bonanza for TTRTR.

This should start a rush buy second homes. Second homes will be in short supply once the restrictions come in, so now is the time to buy. It's also a bonanza for Londoners. They should get far more profit than those pathetic locals who buy homes to live in instead of for their holidays. I think this is just a pretend policy, I know Labour need some extra money to give away to lazy postmen, but this makes no sense at all.

Not at all, I strongly believe that shelves need to be stacked and the shelf-stackers are often wonderful people. However, I already pay generously for his services when I shop in Fortnum's so I'm not quite clear as to why I should pay out several hundred thousand pounds worth of subsidies so he can live in the Barbican. It's not even near the shop! If you can explain why this should be, then I'll happily revise my opinion. The reason I'm looking in this area is because you can still pick up a squalid flat in a former housing project for half a million, obviously I would live in a nicer place if it weren't for the high taxes and socialist housing policy. Check out the other topics on this site if you are interested in the problems caused by high house prices.

Strangely enough, that's exactly the situation I'm in. Wondering whether to spend half a million on a Barbican flat, knowing I'd have the satisfaction of subsidising some scummy shelf-stacker who's renting next door for £150/month. Oh, the joys of living under Socialism.

A brain perhaps? What about landlocked countries like Bolivia, are they islands too?

If only the tories had had the nerve to keep the interest rates high. We could have avoided all the current problems instead of bailing out wealthy homeowners! Now a question for all you lefties. Why did the poor keep voting for Labour in the last election? One of Labour's main policies was to keep house prices high which forces the poor to be even poorer. OK, you'll probably say that if they were bright enough to vote against Labour they'd be bright enough to not be poor, but I think there's more to it than that. Isn't this like some teenager slicing their arms with a knife? There seems to be an element of self-harm in British politics / housing policy.

Yes, this board is overrun by the communists. The answer to the house price problem is simple - just get rid of the socialist planning system and lower the taxes. Then we'll be able to afford the houses we need. Either that or you could try being more abstemious I think that one of the reasons people get angry is because the house price problems are so unnecessary and self-inflicted. If we were struggling to provide food for ourselves or protect our country it would seem a worthwhile effort. Struggling because a few spiteful old gits are manipulating prices to keep us down, somehow seems less rewarding. To those people who say there's no such thing as a free lunch, you need to get out a bit more. Whole swathes of London are full of people scamming the system and doing very nicely thank you.

"One compelling reason for staying outside the euro was the unusual strength of sterling, as it is unwise to fix a currency at an overvalued rate." This sounds stupid to me. Surely, strong Sterling would give us more Euros and make us all richer. Unless they were evil communists trying to make us all poorer... Never mind I think I answered my own question.

I think you'll find that it's the administrators who will be making the decisions on who to fire. Themselves or the doctors and nurses... Tricky one, but I think administration is where I'd feel safest. Read the newspapers about where all the extra health service money went. Maybe 15% of it got to patient care. The rest in administration and pay rises. Anyone know how to become an adminsitrator in education? I hear that's the next big trough.

Not quite clear whether you're for or against outsourcing. Surely "China" wasn't our industry in the first place!?

Is this true? I read somewhere on this site that the bank can call in the loan even if you keep making the payments (which seems extraordinarily harsh). Maybe it depends on the mortgage. What happens if lots of people withdraw their savings at once - do the home loans get called in to pay the depositors?

The answer is for councils to be less greedy and maybe sack a few of the five-fruits-a-dayers or some of the tax abusers of the week. Then they wouldn't need to put their yellow lines and residents parking everywhere to scam yet more money off the motorists. Some places in London (Ealing for example) are even becoming flooded. The Council have stolen all the roadsides and made everyone pave over their gardens, nowhere left to soak up the rain...

These people really are scum. Why should some inbred "local" from Devon get his house for 140,000 less than a Londoner? Whatever happened to equality?

I always though Boris was O.K. but I changed my mind after reading the article. Why does he want us to throw our money away on these greedy old folk. The old man with the house made a healthy profit of over 30 grand at the expense of our generation. And we should all work longer to give handouts to these guys that invested in the wrong pension scheme? Dopey idea if you ask me.

The article has a title "fat cat myths debunked" but I couldn't see any debunking going on. It just repeated what we know from here, public sector workers are becoming even more overpaid and produce less and less. Also, the author, David Walker "writes for The Guardian" so the article is largely funded by the advertising for all these non-jobs. Dog, Keep these tax abuser posts coming. Ignore any whining brownbears and their praise for our creative binmen!?

Yes I've written to my MP, and it does work for local issues. I know that talk of raising taxes is music to a parasite's ears, but what what we really need to do is to get rid of the current planning process. Your local MP is probably some horrid socialist and is implementing the soviet-style command economy housing policy out of pure spite. But, in case I'm wrong (hey, it could happen) why not drop him a line and try to change his mind?

"...with napkins twisted round their thumbs..." So newbie, what's up with the napkins? Are you some kind of morris dancer? Explain yourself.

If I was just retiring, I'd have bought a nice house for £200. I'd get a nice pension paid for by the younger generation. My private pension would be worth twice what someone today would get (only a few years of Brown's pension raids). I'd also have a lot more savings because taxes were lower during my working life. Then I'd get all the extra cold-weather payments, subsidised transport, free use of council facilities and so on. Don't worry about the oldies, they're the ones that did this to us and they're sitting pretty and laughing hard. It never became acceptable. It sucks. It started it when some lefties refused to pay their share of the community charge and kept rioting and stuff. Instead of bringing back the rates (which would have been sensible) we got the iniquitous council tax. This lead to some highly paid layabouts (see the regular tax abuser posts) and suffering for the general population.

see below...

Look at it from the borrower's perspective, starting with no money. Say, they can borrow 10X their salary and spend it on a house, interest only mortgage (might have to be creative on the mortgage forms). Their are a three possible outcomes, judging by what I've read on this site: 1.) House price collapse. They spend their money on beer, so sorry Mr. Banker can't pay the mortgage I'm bankrupt. 2.) Fiat Money Collapse. Pound becomes nearly worthless, they win a free house. 3.) House prices continue to rise. They sell at a big profit. The borrower does fine, either they break even, they get a free house, or they get lots of money. Compare it to the saver who loses out on two of the three options.