Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

jakeshaw

New Members
  • Content Count

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jakeshaw

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie
  1. Whilst I agree that wealth will be destroyed with bankruptcy you have to ask the question, who looses most? From my analysis average Joe on the street has very little to loose, its the established wealth which would bear the brunt. Hence, as they control our governments they will instead ensure their wealth is protected through bailouts and tax rises to average Joe. And the best thing of all, he doesn't know its happened.
  2. The falls of 0.9% are great news! Personally I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking this was certain to happen. IMPO House Prices in 2009 were only "saved" as part of a wider rescue of the entire financial system which faced complete collapse, which would have led to economic meltdown for homeowners or not. I can understand a policy maker's motive to intervene when the market became completely panicked and irrational. This happened in the latter part of 2008 to early 2009, and a policy response was justified (we can argue the finite details of the intervention). Now that the market has marginally stabalised, I honestly believe policy makers will favour an orderly wind down in asset prices - which noone can currently argue are sustainable. So long may that continue
  3. This is exactly the reason why I have my Canadian Citizenship ready and complete A nation with the 2nd largest oil reserves, but one that doesn't presently need to draw on them anything like the others (OPEC, Russia etc). My advice to anyone... make preparations to leave the UK. It's ruined today, but could you imagine a peak oil crisis on top!
  4. Well, I've just got back from work and read many of the posts and it hasn't changed my opinion one bit! Fundamentally, whether it be JSA or Income Support I cannot see why a healthy adult cannot contribute to working for 8-16 hours per week to EARN their benefits. The rest of the time can be spent in training or searching for alternative market economy jobs. In response to the reference by Zagreb that those earning their benefits on £2-3 per hour would be "slave labour"; - These people are getting paid to work - These positions would not exist in the market economy, and have only been created to allow those on benefits to contribute to society - The individuals would only be working 8-16 hours PER WEEK. How is that "slave labour"?!? - Once an individual develops confidence and skills, they can use their experience and get a market economy job. People should not have the right to contribute nothing to society whilst waiting for "THEIR IDEAL JOB". It is completely reasonable to expect those receiving to contribute a small amount back to society for the money received in return whilst they pursue formal training or a search for their desired job. As I said, we need to move from a society of "what can i have" to "what can i give". - And for the record, I am 25, I have been on benefits and I thought the system was a complete joke. In the job centre I was completely surrounded with healthy adults who refused to work and claimed their were "no jobs". I was on JSA for 18 days, and took the first job I was offered.
  5. To me it's simple - abolish income support/job seekers support completely. Change our society from "what can i have", to "what can i give". Make these people WORK in newly created, extremely low paid positions for 8-16hours per week, leaving ample time for searching for a "real job" (cleaning roads, parks, graffiti, etc). They can learn the skill of working every day, and actually earn their £40-100 per week on an equivalent of around £2-3 per hour. A system that would offer support to everyone, but would not give support to those who refuse to give nothing in return. It would also offer a high incentive to move into higher paid formal employment. To the mum's with children, they can send their children to a creche (staffed by others on the support system). Disability is a completely different ballpark, and needs reform to ensure the needy get the best our society can offer; and the pretenders get the worst.
  6. Public sector employes "so skilled and desirable"?! I take it you don't work for a FTSE company, I can safely tell you the opinion of those recruiting is not yours!!
  7. I agree with your comments on low interest rates to support the banks. It true, their margins have increased significantly and this will most certainly help them rebuild their balance sheets. However, on inflation I believe there are more aspects than HPI alone. If we were to put ourselves into the shoes of a policy maker for a second, lets think of the benefits of "moderate" inflation (circa 8-10%) over a sustained period: Debt Inflation: Inflate away not only Mortgage Debt, but personal debt, corporate debt, and perhaps more importantly public sector debt Deficit: The amount the government spends relative to the tax take is currently in a worse state than Greece. Inflation is a brilliant way of cheating public sector workers into reducing their real term pay. Your comments on wages are as yet to premature to accurately determine. Inflation has as yet risen for 6months, and would need a sustained 12m+ period for people to begin to accept the inflation era is back. For me it's simple. You cannot create such large amounts of money through QE without inflation. Yes there's a "supply gap" which should mitigate this, but EVERY economic report has underestimated this so far in 2010. Interesting times.
  8. It's a difficult call, but the fact is inflation is taking off and appears to be heading in a one way direction. It has risen consistently for the last 6months. This was the way many in the 80's/90's "bought" their homes. Not because of hard work and sacrifices, but getting lucky with timing and inflation.
  9. I actually despair reading this. I fail to see how people can be quite that stupid. Regardless on the assumption your not buying a property that is so overvalued YOUR LENDER won't lend on it, I would consider buying on a fixed rate mortgage and ride out the upcoming inflation to capitalise on these gains.
  10. Lets assume a house is bought for £100,000 on a 5% fixed rate mortgage (fixed rate leverage, leverage = debt). Lets also assume inflation of 8%, a comfortable long term average for the UK. FAST FORWARD 5 Years: £25,000 Mortgage Payments - interest only for 5 years (5yr * £5000) House Price Inflation (Nominal Terms): Yr 0 £100,000 Yr 1 £108,000 Yr 2 £116,600 Yr 3 £126,000 Yr 4 £136,000 Yr 5 £147,000 House Price in real terms is STILL £100,000 - ALL the gains have been from inflation. AFTER 5 YEARS: You still owe £100,000 on your interest only mortgage Your house is now worth £147,000 (all the gains have come from inflation)
  11. On the point of inflation (RPI %): 2009 Jan 0.1 . 2009 Feb 0 . 2009 Mar -0.4 . 2009 Apr -1.2 . 2009 May -1.1 . 2009 June -1.6 . 2009 July -1.4 . 2009 Aug -1.3 . 2009 Sep -1.4 . 2009 Oct -0.8 . 2009 Nov 0.3 . 2009 Dec 2.4 . 2010 Jan 3.7 . 2010 Feb 3.7 . 2010 Mar 4.4 . 2010 Apr 5.3 * Provisional May 6.6% (M4 money supply) To me, it's clear that the policy makers (and BoE) temptation to inflate our way out of debt is well and truly underway. House prices may stagnate in real terms, but in nominal are likely to rise. Moreover, just last month the BoE confirmed the intention to maintain low interest rates (i.e. at the expense of high inflation). This came alongside the OECD warning to the UK to avoid the temptation to inflate our way out the problem. My hunch, is the UK will do it anyway - the debts are so big they can never really be repaid so inflation is the ONLY way long term. On this assumption Buy. You want fixed rate leverage.
  12. Good for you, it's nice to know some people can still trust each other! It's also worth pointing out.. whatever option you decide on: You can gift upto £3000 to both your father and mother each tax year (£6,000 first year as you can use last years allowance). This is completely tax free. Thus if paying their mortgage or the "rent", tax implications will only apply to those amounts over £6k Hope this helps
  13. Your Proposition: Parents secure new debt on existing home at 35% LTV. This money is used in combination with your 25% deposit to buy your home. The Solution: Parents secure new debt on existing home at 35%+ LTV. This money is used to purchase a house in their name, which you will rent from them. You can gift £6,000 to both your mother and father each from your saved deposit to assist in "their" house purchase. This property is secured in trust to you from the outset in the event of their death(s). No inheritance tax would be payable in this instance. Adv -You can't be accused of "using" your parents, as they hold both the loan and the asset! -The proceeds of the rent, although taxable present certain tax deductabilities that your parents can take advantage of -No inheritance tax would be payable -If you experienced financial difficulty and you were unable to service your rent => They were unable to service the mortgage => The house could be sold to remove any obligations with minimum hassle/disruption. Disadv -You'd need to trust your parents, but judging from your post I assume you do!
  14. Funny you say that, I'm off to Canada in 14 months and counting In my opinion, as a highly educated individual whom is privileged to have labour demand across many countries I firmly believe this country has nothing to offer young people except mountains of debt and a declining standard of living! I encourage anyone whom is waiting "for things to get better" to look elsewhere than the UK. Hey, you can always come back?!
×
×
  • 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.