Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

dipstick

Members
  • Posts

    1,258
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dipstick

  1. You both bring me on to the question of capital gains. Do you pay it on the selling price of the property or on the profit you made on the property? I still think you are missing the bigger picture. The only way she is ever going to have to pay taxes on the properties is if she sells them (presuming she never gets around to renting) If you bought a house in 1998 for 20k and then sell it 15 years from now...150k? on paper that's a nice little pension even if CG takes 40% of whatever. Plus, meanwhile, also that property has cost you 25k in council tax, that money has been off-set against profits earned on the businesses. God only knows what else you can claim. Apparently it's called unearned income. Yes, it would be better to rent them in that you'd get more income. But you'd also have to put in a bit of effort.
  2. You see I used to think it was a psychological thing - and in part, still think it is - but now I'm thinking she's actually being very clever. If the costs of maintaining all her properties, including a couple of statics that she uses as temporary homes, are claimed as costs and off-set against the shops, then her tax bill will be much reduced and meanwhile the rental properties have gained in value. Whilst she's holding a block of properties in a certain area and not releasing them on to the market, it will ensure the values maintain unless property really does plummet.
  3. She says not. Says she's been paying the full whack for a few years now. She's also got a few shops (which do earn rental) so I'm supposing that the costs attributed to the non-rented properties off-set the costs of the shops?
  4. A long term friend has several houses, 9 in fact. Yet none of these properties is actually available to rent. Indeed, all but one aren't actually of a condition to rent. Yet, still after many years she pays council tax on all of them, maintains the current standard in addition to doing a few renovations, and for a long while it seemed to be a case of 'more money than sense.' But is it? All costs are off-set against tax. Assets continue to acquire value. By not releasing the homes for either sale or rent, both prices are maintained. The downside is that if the properties were to be sold capital gains tax would have to be paid, but hey, she ain't selling - capital gains is a right rip-off! To be honest I actually think that ethically it stinks, and I'm a spit from telling her so in no uncertain terms - but surely the benefits of this, compared to the costs, can't be that beneficial? And also, how many other people are out there doing this? How many homes are being accumulated but not released back on to the market either by selling or renting?
  5. Patience, patience... I thought you didn't know. I was going into shock, I was!!!! I will go read graphs and charts and stuffs.
  6. Can I take it from the lack of replies that it's not just me, but that nobody else knows either? Good grief. If I can't get this question answered here - then nobody really does know!
  7. Okay. So I hear this argument all around me. "We give Europe zillions and don't get anything back!" Now I know that isn't strictly the case. In fact, I've been in situation where I've been giving out money that comes from European funds. However, I don't have the facts. If indeed the facts are either a) available or transparent. Does anybody know where I can go for a pootle to have a look at how much we (as a nation) give to Europe and also how much we get back?
  8. This kind of nonsense has been my gripe with the country starting a long way back. It's actually one of the reasons, in fact the main reason, I went to Uni. I applied for a job in 1993 as a veterinary nurse - bearing in mind I left school in 1976 and worked as a kennel maid, vet nurse, dog groomer - the whole kebang. I was asked on the phone if I had A level maths. No, said I. Oh, says the vet, we can't consider you then. Hang on, says I, I've got experience coming out of my ears. The vet would have none of it. I went to Uni. What's more valuable, experience of doing the job for years or a qualification that may prove you might be able to do the job? But, it does absolve people of making the decision and taking responsibility for the dopes they do employ. I remember a few years back our company was looking for a driver. The manager and district whatever did the interviewing and gave one chap the job - he ticked all the right boxes. Shame nobody thought to put in a box asking if he'd actually got a driver's license. No. He hadn't. FFS!
  9. Okay, so I used to look on Nethouseprices (I think) but they appear to have handed over the Scottish side of the site to GSPC - and their link is completely useless. Which site can I go on now and look up the sold prices in Scotland - without paying for the priviledge?
  10. Let's just get a few things straight: It was you that said a loaf would only be £10 - not me. It was you that said food was cheap - but it isn't compared to 10 years ago. It was you that said modern farming produced cheap food due to economies of scale. But that was short termism, working on the presumption that gains would maintain or increase - they are actually falling. Why aren't farmers jumping on the small farm bandwagon - because they get subsidies. Stop the subsidies and see what happens to farming. What is the difference between paying for a subsidy and paying for a more expensive loaf? Well, depends where the money comes from, doesn't it. Do you know how much money has come from Europe to support farming in the UK? Do you know how much money has gone into supporting rural/remote economies? Bigger question - how much of this money really exists? How long can external subsidies support our farms? Tell you what figures I'd like to see: The ones that really show how much it costs to produce a loaf of bread in the UK. Really. Your problem is you don't really know what you are arguing about. You say that food has never been cheaper and have some romanticised notion of living in a 'shelter' and eating a couple of loaves a week. Yet, I'd like to bet you've never had any involvement in a farm and have central heating.
  11. No, actually it's not common sense. It's not even correct. In fact, it's contradictory. Tell me what the minimum wage was 10 years ago. I can tell you a loaf was about 17p from somewhere like Lidl. Then tell me food is cheaper now. If we weren't 'forced' to pay the subsidies, then you could have your £10 loaf. Good luck with feeding yourself - cos I'm presuming you have no other outgoings whatsoever? Hmm. Cost of production? If you're talking about the times when heavy horses were in use, farmer labourers used to get one of the lowest wages. Most of them had two jobs. Intensive farming today costs a fortune to set up and maintain - massively more expensive than horses. Or do you just think you buy tractors and combines and they look after themselves (of course, you do ;-0) Plus, and HEAR me. Land is drained of nutrients, we get less yields year, after year, after year. It costs more in chemicals to keep that land productive on an annual basis. The only way is UP. Even farmers are now starting to mutter about smaller farms and smallholdings being the way to go. Thing is, the public would have to get used to having less food available to them - tough call. Who exactly is it you're trying to blame here and for what? Read a book called The Clifton Park Method of Farming. Go learn something. OOh, you're not a student are you?
  12. Do you actually read and then try and comprehend what people put? I actually said taxpayers pay for the subsidies. These are the folk that you think are being stolen from....???? Bread is cheap because what.... You could not possibly afford to buy bread if you had to pay for all the ferilizers, farm machinery, etc. Land these days produces LESS than it did per acre 30 years ago. They have to keep using more fertilizers etc (and thus spending more) just to maintain yields. They have to import top soil from one area of the country to another just to give nutrients back to the land and restrict sand blow. Oh yes. And that happens abroad too. And cheap labour. Some of those people really know what it's like to live in 'shelters' to give you cheap food. Ultimately it costs a fortune in both money and someone's quality of life to give you your cheap bread. You obviously have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Get out there and do it. I'll lend you my scythe.
  13. Seriously Traktion, if I still had my little place in Aberdeenshire, I'd let you have a corner of the field for winter. ... and I'd make a documentary!!! Just wondering how you would fetch the bread when the snow was 10 feet deep for 4 weeks but... guess we'd find that out!
  14. Ooh, you are funny! That £1 for a loaf of bread is only £1 because the folk who pay taxes subsidise the production of wheat - yer plank! And if everybody decided to take a bit of 'cheap' land, build a 'shelter' and live nicely, then there would be even less land to grow the wheat and hence your bread would become even more expensive. And this shelter, where is it going to be: Dorset, Cornwall - Somebody lend this guy the top of a hill in Inverness for the winter, would you? Oh, and he'll need a tarpaulin to make a shelter....
  15. What is this 'stealing from others' you keep going on about? With NI contributions you pay in and then get it back. Hopefully. If you die, you don't. I love this 'free access to land,' statement. What yer gonna do with it when you get it? Oh. Don't tell me. Your gonna grow stuff - of course you are dear. It's easy. There's a thousand and one reasons why people can't be fed cheaply. Try, the land is exhausted already. Try - You think all regions are the same, climate wise. Try, not all geography sustains cultivation. I hereby quote John McCrone ' Romantisicm is essentially a spectator sport.'
  16. Can't say as I have no experience. He just told me they are the exception rather than the rule?
  17. Hmm. This is probably where I get jumped on from a great height, but: It's actually very difficult to get someone's benefit stopped. I don't know about fraud, but I only once made an effort to this regarding somebody who was actively avoiding work. What happens is they get emergency payments until the situation is 'resolved.' In theory, you can't leave people to starve. The other aspect is with benefit cheats regarding working. Don't stop anything. Just make them sign off and do the job they were doing when they got caught. Again. You can tie yourself in knots 'punishing folk,' but all that happens is they bust a gut to get back on benefits to miminise the consequences. Thing is, if they can work and are willing to work and have a job they are willing to do - just get them the working tax credit or whatever to make it worth their while and push them out the door! One more off the unemployment figures! You start to punish them and the buggers come back!
  18. Not if nobody had got any means of buying that land, property, or shares they wouldn't. If the only medium of exchange was cash - think about it. How are the 1% rich going to sell their land or their shares or get the divvies on their shares (presuming the credit system was still down the loo) How is the rich man with the yacht going to fuel it without cash, or is he going to have to swap some of his other assets (a spare house or two) to do it? Besides. What person, rich or poor, buys his assets with cash in the first place?
  19. Yeah, cos geniune insurance companies are so reliable when it comes to paying out. Are you old enough to remember endowment policies????? I'm not quite sure whose more scary, governments or insurance companies....
  20. Ooh, doesn't this go to prove the theory that in the end we are all equally wealthy (or poor) If all the systems failed tomorrow most people would have similar amounts of cash left in their pockets. I've got £11.24!
  21. They are preparing for old age - it's called NI contributions.
  22. Well, I'm just looking at the benefit culture, purely because that's how the thread started out and it's what I am talking about relative to what everybody else is saying. Do I agree with your regarding the 2nd para??? Don't know the figures for the benefits north vs south. Can't comment. Do I agree with a system that promotes neediness? Phew. Well, that depends on your interpretation. If somebody comes out of work, or is ill, they need enough money to survive (and by that I don't just mean a can of beans per day) They also need enough incentive to get them back into work. I tell you one thing I was pleased to see brought in, and that was the Working Tax Credit - I was thrilled. Prior to this I had worked with the long-term unemployed and the worst affected were single men. Either never married or divorced. Plus, this is the group that are classed as 'fit to work,' and therefore hit the system (as opposed to other singles). Prior to Working Tax Credit (and minimum wage) these men were being forced to take jobs that hardly covered their bedsit rent. Nobody can afford to live like that. They were under tremendous pressure to live in destitution no matter which way they turned. Minimum wage comes in and instead of these blokes being offered £2.20 an hour and being told they had to take the work, they were being offered £5.75. Then we got Working Tax Credit. All great stuff from where I (and possibly they) were standing. Don't know what the minimum wage is now (I could Google but can't be bothered) just guessing but comparative to house prices, petrol, rents and the general cost of living, this will have gone down. Therefore, is the benefits system more attractive and therefore promoting neediness or aren't wages enough of an incentive? Plus, of course, we may be all missing a small point in that the work place is no longer as secure as it was. The benefits system may appeal to folk precisely because of it's security?
  23. I'm presuming this statement is from a woman who has a family to rely on? Or a reliable family? Sorry folks, but some of these statements are typical of the very comfortable.
  24. ... I think the folk who invested with Mr Maxwell thought they were doing just that... (preparing for their future, not SBs comment about having them already - I should've quoted...)
  25. Not wanting to come down on either side of this argument at the minute, but: Regarding house prices in Germany. I've been looking at property abroad and from what I could see (I wasn't looking at Germany in particular) their house prices seemed remarkably reasonable. Also, I've got a friend who works there, he says the same thing. He also tells me that credit cards are considered to be something from another planet...
×
×
  • 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.