Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Frugal Git

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Frugal Git

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Agreed on all points. Even if the battery in my model S degrades, by the time it does hopefully there will be a decent market in reasonably priced repairs or replacements. Worst case is I shell out maybe £15k to Tesla. But with the free grandfathered supercharging, I’ll have saved that in fuel costs vs petrol in less than 7 years. The long term value of free supercharging on the pre 2017 cars is severely underestimated. no doubt that the range on mine will look like a joke in 10-15 years, but it’ll always cost me nothing to charge. Who knows what energy costs will be by then? the buzz looks brilliant. A long term solution to my housing needs if my life changes right there. Finally the base spec F150 lightning is a real steal at the US prices if the final production is anything like the ones that Ford have demo’d so far.
  2. Clarkson, harris, that chap who does Harry’s Garage on YouTube, everyone. I haven’t read a single negative thing. historically pretty much any rally homologation special isn’t a bad buy. They almost invariably become hugely desirable eventually. This looks the best of all in some ways to buy new, because it’s a Toyota and they give you a massive warranty.
  3. If I had the space to park it, I would probably buy a GR Yaris as a second car though. I doubt it’ll lose money over 15 years.
  4. Tesla Model S Performance spec, 4 years old, cash buy second hand early this year. One of the last of the ‘free transferable supercharging’ cars. Done 7k miles so far, ~£20 *total* spend on charging costs when I couldn’t supercharge or charge for free. current subsidies on congestion charges parking, etc won’t last so making the most of it. Plan to keep it as long as possible. Total ownership costs amortised over 15 years, I reckon it’ll cost me about £30 p/m more than a petrol avensis would have.
  5. I agree with what you've said, but tbh, any salary over the threshold for benefits gets destroyed. The second your effective income (wage + benefits) gets tapered by your real income (just your wages), the effect is the destruction of incentive. My marginal tax rate on the portion between 50-60k is over 100%. Insanity.
  6. I wouldn’t give a sh*t if interest rates were 15%, 50% or 500%. Zero debt, zero worries. I don’t give it a sh*t if they are zero or negative either any more either. None of us have any choice any more. The only game in town is to speculate and hope you’re right based on what these idiots ‘in charge’ do, whilst living well within your means. But in my fantasies, I’d love to see them at just 6% to wash the crap out of the system/see who’s been swimming naked/see it all burn.
  7. great. I doubt they would be able to find much ‘evidence’ - as i said, investment dealings are pretty much anonymous in the main, and an article that was framed something like ’hmmm - why did house builders shares rise so much in 2012, when the housing market and ftse did not?’, had it been published in 2013 straight after help to buy was announced could have been potential dynamite. Sadly, doing so now, not so much, but written in a certain way alongside more current info could still make people think, which is all that can be asked really.
  8. Also, it’s worth mentioning that help to buy was particularly interesting because iirc, there was absolutely no leaks or indication that it was going to be announced prior to the budget. I remember we all went apoplectic on here after the budget, but not before. If there had been rumours in the months leading up to it, the price action with the homebuilders shares would have been more understandable, because there would definitely have been speculative purchases. In the total absence of rumours …. the market behaviour was very odd. If anything you would have expected a flatlining.
  9. No further comment. Apologies on phone I couldn’t set the range on the graph for persimmon, but I think you can visually see the lack of correlation from end 2011-2013
  10. I’ve said it a 1000 times. Some journalist should look at the share prices of the house builders (persimmon etc) in 2012 upto budget 2013, when help to buy was announced. Home Prices were stagnant. The rest of the FTSE was rising anaemically. The home builders were going up *a lot*. And after help to buy was announced, even more so. Put simply, some people made a lot of money. Now, MPs don’t need to disclose their investments/holdings unless they own 10% of a listed company. Obviously to own 10% of a FTSE100 takes billions, so declarations of ownership or purchases of any company in any sector would not be commonplace or ‘in the public interest’ in those. In stating the above two paragraphs, I am not suggesting there is a link. I’m just saying these two things as a fact. I’m not saying anything untoward went on, or casting aspersions on the right honourable members of our parliament. But the market action on the house builders in the lead up to budget 2013 made no sense, and it would be curious to understand why. If I was a journalist, I’d have been digging.
  11. Bang on. In my early days of ‘investing’ (I.e. naively trading) I lost at least 30k in equities, which represented 25% of my net worth at the time, and about 1/2 that was locked up in the pension anyway. And the reason for me trying this? because the BOE and governments actions convinced me I had to speculate just to keep up with House price inflation, as saving in cash for deposit or purchase was pointless. Did I ask for a bailout, or props - no. The losses were effectively my tuition fees and i shrugged and moved on. (the funny part is had I held those shares I was trading I’d be a multimillionaire. Most were tech firms.)
  12. It is not totally clear cut that Tax credits were more generous than UC, at least in terms of financial benefit. In terms of hassle from the state, for sure - TC was better. here are the two extremes I think : best off on tax credits : single parent 16hr min wage/24 hour between couple, mortgage, lots of kids, high savings (over 16k). - on the above, you’ll get 0 UC. but a substantial amount of tax credits. Best off on UC : meet minimum income floor, rent, lots of kids, very low savings (under 6k). * the housing element of UC is substantial, so for renters you can end up very well off. On tax credits, you would have had to have used this in conjunction with housing benefit, which is means tested and had different tapers. In certain circs, you can be hundreds of pounds better off on UC. UC also entitled you to lots of other bits and pieces, that are hidden from view.
  13. Yes, I’ve heard the same in that regard. On that score, we have it very good here.
  • 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.