Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

plummet expert

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by plummet expert

  1. Is credit the only thing keeping businesses going, keeping people spending? What would happen to the economy if the credit stopped? What percentage of the borrowing have they purposely factored in and expect to go into default, quite a fair bit I would expect.....keeps the plates spinning.


    An increase in personal credit at this juncture indicates a small lift in confidence that the so called recovery is here to stay. Unfortunately this will be proved wrong as markets are gradually heading towards a precipice. The balance of payments is showing the largest deficit since records began in 1955 ! This shows borrowing in the economy, whether govt or corporate or privat, as a whole, is woefully out of control.

  2. The UK national debt is roughly £1,470 billion, and increasing by about £44 bn per year - the annual budget deficit.

    However, building a house costs about £50k, and they sell for £200k.

    So if the government simply got into the business of house-building, it could build about ten million (total cost: £500 bn), and could sell them for about 2,000 bn, making enough money to pay off the entire national debt.

    And, as a bonus, an end to the housing crisis.

    Problem solved.


    The Structural deficit is still £97 billion pa, not £44 bn. Even £97 bn is a fiddled figure:

    The Govt is still quietly taking QE money in the form of APF which is interest on the debt the Bank of England bought back with the phoney money being QE.

    Last month the Govt received £4.1 bn of this imaginary money said to be PSB neutral - so invented on the bank of England computer and sent to the Treasury I assume.

    The amount of income tax taken in the last year increased by only £200 million, when employment grew by half a million people and the govt claims wages are rising faster than inflation - it's not everyone's experience. Most people feel they are getting poorer, but a little more slowly.

    The Autumn statement grossly exaggerated the improvements in the economy. The key claim that the Govt has cut the deficit in half since 2010 is not entirely true. The Chancellor has swapped to using a measure of debt as a percentage of GDP instead of looking at the actual fall in month to month debt. Even then if we look at the last year, the debt expressed this way has risen from 77.7% to 79.5% of GDP.

    No wonder Labour has opened up a 5 point poll lead, even though Balls and Miliband have no clue. Smoke n Mirrors rule. I will Vote UKIP and have the nature of politics changed, along with saving £9 bn and rising, on EU membership , and reducing overseas aid by about £9 bn pa - and so much else.....

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_386141.pdf see pages 8 & 9

  3. There are great similarities, except we now appear to be weaker coming out of the depression than in the 1930's. We may have avoided the very lowest point suffered in the 1930's but if that is because we have massively borrowed and printed to cause the feeble growth, then it will be worse from here. We have no credit left. The world begins to deflate. Our growth falls and borrowing rises even more significantly. This scenario lays bare the fact that our national debt cannot be serviced and bond sales dry up. We are not a manufacturing exporting nation in any sufficient way. We rely on pumping up house prices and consumption. Our balance of payments has been negative for almost all of the last 40 years. We have allowed foreign investment to such an extent that we do not own large parts of the economy and are losing out on Corporation tax since too much of the profit is sent abroad.

    Hopefully better growth will overcome this. No guarantees unfortunately. As an exception, I do believe a house price crash would actually be healthy and although disturbing for some, ultimately would lead to renewed vigour in the economy if tied to controlled lending in the residential sector. We also need to control foreign investment in property and tighetn our company takeover code. Then we could encourage the creation of both more banks and enrgy companies. I had better stop....

  4. Why post this story now, nearly 6 months after it was in the paper ?

    Why indeed? The national debt has reached £1,450 Billion. Ie £1.45 Trillion

    There is no respite. We are not growing enough to stop the debt piling up or pay one penny back. At only 2% the interest payment would be £70 bn per year.

    I earned about this on this site in 2010. The ring fencing of education and health was politically easier but actually long term foolish. It will all be worse for not dealing with it in 2010. We also pay £11.5 bn pa for overseas aid when we cannot afford it. It was £4 bn in 2010. We pay £8.6 bn to the Eu which is net of any receipts. A total waste. We cost industry billions on wasted ted tape over the Eu.

    We need to ask, just how much tax will you pay for people to miss their nhs free appointments? We need property prices and assets to fall and get our economy into balance. We need to control land speculation now. We need to reverse the effect of QE which has slaughtered any sense of financial justice. We will all have to vote UKIP as they are more likely to tell you the unfortunate truth.

  5. Wow, 10 hours since I first read about this, yet no mention here.

    Unsurprisingly the right wing press didn't seem that interested in this news (it certainly didn't appear in the headlines) so it was left to the Russian's http://rt.com/uk/202455-eu-migrants-uk-20bn/ and the left wing press to inform people http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/05/eu-migrants-uk-gains-20bn-ucl-study

    Migrants from new EU countries like Poland have contributed about £5bn http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29910497

    However, the right wing media has tried it best to divert attention, by pointing to all (i.e. including non-EU) immigrants http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/531670/Immigration-taxpayer-Britain-118billion-17-years

    Interesting analysis here of what's going on in the press http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2014/11/05/powerful-forces-try-to-rubbish-positive-immigration-report One thing in this article got me thinking, if these migrant workers don't actually stay in the UK for more than a year or two we get the benefit of educated workers (Poland beats UK in PISA) whose education we didn't pay for, and we don't pay for their care costs in later life as they leave before they get old and unwell. I'd go as far as to say only an anti-capitalist would argue this is a bad thing. :D

    Oh and before someone starts about immigrants and housing costs, may I refer you to the graph on the frontpage, the biggest leaps in house prices were before Poland etc. joined the UK.


    You have missed the simple fact that the figure is the turnover increase by the presence of more persons. It has nothing to do with the possible costs of their being here. If the size of the cake did not increase as a result of their presence then it would inevitably mean the slice of the GDP cake per person (real GDP) WOULD SHRINK. In fact the recently published figures from the ONS have demonstrated that the real GDP of this country has actually shrunk in recent years. Obviously that varies from person to person. There is no way in the world that a huge influx of often unskilled migrants on low wages can have assisted our economy. I would be here if I was them and lay no blame upon them trying to improve their lives. On a minimum wage - I will give you a real life example - A woman with 6 children (so her paperwork claims) all of whom live in Latvia, works in retail on £6.50 per hour, but her wages do not cover her costs. She claims housing benefit, child tax credits, tax credits (working 30 hrs per week) AND child benefit for six kids. That scenario is actual and according to my knowledge. This is the problem. Lovely though many of these folk are, they rarely make UK PLC a profit as such. They often send the money they make home and so it's not recirculating in our economy. That would take a long time. The biggest difficulty is there is a scarcity of housing, pressure on hospitals/GP's who are at breaking point and no more space without building over FarmLand. So your choice is to stop this or allow it and face the costs and consequences of continuing to add to what is already a highly populated country. Population of France per sq Km = 114, UK PER SQ KM= 255

  6. The UKIP and SNP development are interesting, but I think Labour will have enough to limp over the line with a small majority.

    The economy will be head into recession (the last one which we haven't really got out of started in 2008, so we are due for one). Labour won't cope well with the recession, the public will riot when they realise Labours promises were lies, the markets will panic, then we will have the mother of all house price crashes.

    Sound realistic?


  7. But, but, but...

    Somebody said rent controls create shortages.

    Well oddly enough they are wrong, not for pure economic reasons but because govt can arrange otherwise. When there were rent controls in Britain UP TIL THE 1970'S THERE WAS also alot more social housing and lower immigration. Rent controls never resulted in a discussion suggesting there was a shortage of housing! There were moans about standards of private rented housing, so what's changed!!!????

    Waht we need is lower LAND prices and these should be controlled, not the cost of building. Specualtion on Land should be properly taxed and loans for homes should be properly controlled to match incomes and capability to pay. I could have it all tickety boo within 5 years......

  8. Of course the Govt should build sufficient social housng. we haven't doen that for decades now. We should all recognise that selling off council houses was ultinately a mistaken policy. It led to higher home prices; dissatisfaction that some people got free equity via a discount; and homes not being replaced so depleting social housing stock. Add to this the rediculous loose lending allowed by banks AND allowing foreign investors to buy and sell without tax, it has been recipe for mind blowing price hikes.

    UKIP will put its common sense hat on I think. They seem to have an interesting mixture of policy, not just a left nor right stance. I suspect they may do rather better than alll the predictions.

    The Tory fear campaign that only the Tories will guarantee an EU referendum is ahollow and cynical manouvre. The fact is, if you vote in a UKIP mp then they would either join with a minority Tory party to force an EU referendum, OR THEY COULD influence it if in parliament with a Tory majority. They could even save the Tories should Labour have more seats but less than a majority, by joining forces AND AGAIN force an EU Referendum.

    MR Cameron has few friends amongst Tory activists now and is in a weaker position than even he realises. I can't see a Labour majority happening atall

  9. I was at an office in Milton Keynes this morning (long story, don't ask) and all the phone conversation from the 4 EA's in the office were all offers being turned down.

    The responses I heard were

    "the owner has a large mortgage"

    "the owner does not need to sell"

    "there is a chain"

    "the owner has improved the property since then and expect the full price"

    The EA's have no idea that the last bubble never properly burst due to govt measures. The new one is even worse and has a bit more to give, but it will burst with a bigger bang than should have happened through 2010-11. If Govt had properly dealt with this, base interest rates would long ago have been returned to about 4% and mortgage multiples could have been capped at 2.5 x income when homes came down in price anyway. Then we would be looking at growth in the productive sector and homes being bought because they are shelter and not just some speculative investment. Investment would have gone towards industry and output and exports. That would have been real rebalancing of the economy. We have no such thing. The only thing the Bof E govnor is right about; the housing market is the biggest risk to the UK economy. I would already have put it right and real growth would now have begun. Real wages against the cost of living would be improving. Instead? People in the their 20's and 30's cannot buy a bed sitting room on their salary. The level of PROPERTY poverty amongst anyone sub 35 in the UK is very high due to property prices and rents. We have the home owners controlling the rest and its not good for our country. I have FAR too much equity in my home for the time I have owned it. It is rediculous that it has risen 4 x in just 17 yrs during a period of very low inflation.

  10. Supply has picked up slightly from Winter lows.

    The source EA Today above used now: http://www.home.co.uk/company/stats.htm

    Also it takes very few sellers and buyers to agree lower prices, for all other owners to see the values of their homes fall. That's how markets work.

    Widow-A holds on, not wanting to sell home for less than £695,000, but Widow-B with little in savings, feeling bills mount up, or an expensive roof/damp repair to the house needs doing, deciders to get real, and sells for less to someone who now qualifies for a smaller MMR mortgage at £490K, and guess what? Widow-A's house is down-valued even though she wasn't on the market for sale, when it happens in just a few number. We could easily be at such a market point. An inflection point.

    That's how HPI worked on the way up, when £695K owner, bought for £30K back in 1964. Other buyers in the area, over the years and decades, paid ever higher prices for homes, pushing hers up on comparable. It works same way to make all values fall. And supply is ticking up in some other non UK prime markets I track too, finally. Not by much, but hyperinflated 2.0 prices finally seeing more owners looking to cash in on that - and buyers may be in decline post MMR etc.

    I think you mean a house worth £695k today was probably about £6k in 1964, not £30k. Some places have risen more than 65 x in the time period 1964 to today!

  11. The UKIP candidate highlights the problem exactly from the tory local councillor view. There are many people whio oppose further development as it may involve eating up green belt and consuming towns. There are far too many people on our tiny Island causing the pressure on housing. The number of homes with 6 persons or more is now soaring as families become extende and sharers increse rapidly.

    Sure, the number of houses being built is too low to release the pressure BUT, THEY ARE ALL TOO ***K*** EXPENSIVE FOR ANYONE NORMAL TO BUY. The 'help to buy' is just pushing up prices. The real culprit is lending policy causing people to offer 4x two incomes plus a deposit for a home!!!! The last Gov of the B of E, dear old Mervyn King was absolutely right when he said people will borrow whatever they are allowed by a bank.

    You only have to look at France and Germany to realise we have got it WOEFULLY WRONG. It is ruining our childrens future. We oldies need to relinquish this false equity so the younger ones can afford to buy on their salaries. We did not earn the money which made our £35k house in the North Lanes of Brighton become £475k in 22 yrs did we? We did not earn the equity of a house in Brighton bought in 1970 for £10k now being 'worth' £680k did we? NO, these 3 bedroom examples are not even large homes but are actual examples I am aware of in my own family. For £680k you could buy a chateau with vinyards in France.

    Our prices are too high because of GOVT policy on easy lending; no doubt about it. It causes BOOm and Buuuuuuussst (once abolished by Brown). You don't hear of boom and bust in France or Germany. We nned social housing and sensible strict lending.

    UKIP is right - we do not need immigrants to make the pressure worse still. There is no space. Currently 212,000 net immigrants per year is madness. about 300, 000 leave every year. Why not allow only 200,000 to come in and net effect is reduction by 100,000 pa.

    No one could claim that we could not find enough skilled persons from 200,000 people. I will now vote UKIP and suggest we all do, at least until we are out of the EU and can controil our own destiny. Don't get it wrong, I like our diverse country and all the advantages of having a mixture of cultures, but we have no room to comfortably accept more. It is opponents of UKIP who keep tyrying to call this agenda racist when it is nothing of the sort. Just let's have our democracy back in Westminster.

  12. Carney and Osborne have no clue. They will allow pump priming and discuss itin clever terms until it goes wrong then they will discuss that in other clever terms. The could just listen......land costs too much and people are allowed to borrow too much to buy it so the price rises. Help to buy is helping 20% price increases arrive and then the wheels come off. It's that simple. Control it!

    I see some of you want to vote UKIP. I know we have all seen some news on candidates who have now been fired. I have begun to wonder why the news is so interested in UKIP candidates as opposed to the other parties.

    I have been sent some info:

    Here is something that you won't see on the BBC, Sky News or any of the front national newspapers.

    Since Monday this week, there have been 17 Lib/Lab/Con councillors arrested, charged or convicted of offences including perverting the course of justice, child pornography, firearms and electoral fraud. In the same period, a further 13 have been involved in racism, sexism or homophobic scandals. Only 1 - Lord Hanningfield - has featured in the national media.

    If any of them would have been UKIP, they would have made the news.

    Take a look, and see how many of these you can spot in the national media!

    Tory councillor in Chingford to be sentenced today over firearms charges

    Tory councillor resigns from party over firearms conviction in Somerset

    'Independent' councillor - whose wife is a Labour county councillor - has disqualification for bullying reduced to 18 months

    Labour councillor has case adjourned until safely after the election after her own (Labour controlled) council makes shambles of court paperwork in Thurrock

    Former Lib Dem councillor now standing as independent charged with benefits fraud in Kingston

    Conservative councillor arrested over false barrister claims in Guildford

    Lib Dem councillor convicted of benefit fraud charges forced of council committees after refusing to resign in Tiverton

    Conservative councillor receives one year ban for drink driving in Skegness

    Police launch electoral fraud investigation into Labour councillor in Slough over intimidation relating to postal votes

    Conservative candidate disqualified after £30k benefits fraud conviction comes to light in Enfield

    5 Labour councillors resign from party in Middlesbrough citing racism of local Labour Party among other complaints

    Tory council accused of turning blind eye to license breaches at pub owned by Tory councillor during function on behalf of Tory mayor in Crayford

    SNP activists claims Tory councillor made sexist remarks (but nobody else heard) in Berwickshire

    Labour councillor faces investigation over homophobic remarks directed at gay rival in Liverpool

    More resignations from Labour Party in Thanet following leader's resignation over homophobia claims earlier this week


    Tories - 2 on firearms offences, 1 for falsely claiming to be a barrister, 1 drink driving ban, 1 disqualified for benefits fraud, 1 cronyism over pub license breach, 1 accused of sexist remarks

    Labour - 1 banned from office for bullying, 1 cronyism delaying prosecution for benefits fraud, 1 electoral fraud allegation, 5 resignations over racism claims, 2 resignations over homophobia claims, 1 facing investigation into homophobic remarks

    Lib Dem - 2 on benefits fraud charges

  13. That's not always true.

    The Conservatives tried it for the 1974 general election with the Barber Boom/Dash for Growth house and house price lunacy (not quite on the same scale of lunacy as currently) - and they lost.

    The Conservatives were in power during the the end of 1980s/ early 90s CRASH! and they were re-elected in 1992.

    That's the two main house price booms before the current one.

    House prices were starting to pick up before the 1997 general election but the Conservatives were wiped out.

    It's not all about house prices - there are other factors to take into account.

    That's right! Don't also forget the feeble Maudling boom of 1963 and the tories lost to Labour in 1964. The fact is many people know that rising home prices, that go far beyond wage increases lead to trouble. The current help to buy policy is sheer lunacy. Wages have barely picked up and some are still falling, yet houses are going up now, in some areas quite sharply.

    The British voter is less wedded to tory and Labour than for many generations. There is a shift taking place with UKIP causing it. True, you won't be seeing a UKIP Govt ANY TIME SOON, BUT YOU WILL SEE UKIP MP's. The intervening issue is the EU and immigration policy. The polls show that Cameron/Osborne are not seeing a tory resurgence. People do not want Cameron or Osborne to lead the country. They are not that sure of Ed Milliband, although they appreciate him speaking out against the cot of living. He is missing the target. Homes and Rents costs far too much! I heard the BBC radio 4 announce that if wages had kept up with home prices since 1984, then average wages would be £87,000 pa. WE KNOW THAT! I have time and again said prices are up to 50% too high. People are able to borrow rediculous multiples of their income and help to buy is on the top! That makes the prices sky high, when if they were allowed to borrrow these stupid sums, the prices would generally fall to match - some prime London and cash/investment property excepted. Compare the price of a French home to LONDON/SOUTH EAST HOME

    http://www.rightmove.co.uk/overseas-property/property-34692163.html?premiumA=true THAT'S FOUR HOUSES ON 10 ACRES

    http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-42216178.html THATS ONE 3 BED END OF TERRACE

  14. You've never had it so bad! Superlie has been in power for years, successfully pulling the wool over the eyes of many of the electorate. Let's lie about tuition fees; re-balancing the economy; reducing the deficit - now doubled. Let's lie about living standards; QE and its effect; 'we are all in it together' ; growth not related to property pump priming; exports falling; savings rates at a 40 yr low ; a balance of payments crisis, the worst in 25 yrs.

    Let's remember that between 1947 and 1974, the UK ran a trade surplus and since 1974 we have barely had a surplus. We now have phoney money created 'at will' by banks making loans. We have the most expensive housing and rents we have ever seen in the South, compared to wages, so where is the success? The biggest stumbling block to any true recovery and re-direction of investment towards the productive economy, is the way we allow borrowing for homes and BTL investment for residential homes. It' s fake growth being reported as a true improvement in wealth creation. Which such 'boom' created any lasting wealth? Chancellors; Maudling 1963-4, Barber 1973-4; Lawson 1986-8; Brown 'no more boom and bust' 2002-8. Brown's contribution created the biggest, longest hike in homes prices ever (excluding wage and other price inflation).

    During this period we have lost more than half our manufacturing base. Making PUMPING up home prices a Brish Govt policy has meant that we have had to pay much larger wages to keep up. Over time, we have found we couldn't manufacture anything a for a price the world could pay or even a price we would be prepared to pay ourselves....

    You've never seen it so sad......

  15. Well, Juvenal - where are you sitting so I can pretend to look you in the eye while I don't answer your question ? - Juvenal, this debate has really exposed Nigel Farage. You may not be aware of all the details, Juvenal, but there's something called the European Union which has given us the prosperity and freedom I, err you, enjoy today. Nigel Farage wants to take all of that away and turn the clock back to a time when Britian was an appalling and reactionary place. So, Juvenal, if you love your country you'll be pleased to know that I've put that man Farage firmly in his place.

    Our prosperity has NOTHING to do with being a member of the EU. We may trade with them, but have no need to be ruled by them. The % of GDP exported TOthe EU by Norway and Switzerland both exceeds ours and they are NOT inthe EU and don't want to be. They retain their own currency.

    There is no wealth pot created by the EU - in fact it is a failing economic area. It has landed all southern Europe with being actually bust and youth unemployemnt as high as 63% in Greece.

  16. Looks like Clegg's taking a trouncing...

    Boy against a man...

    The fact is that Clegg has lost the popular vote of the people when it comes to the EU debate. In latest polls 72% want Britain to come out of the EU. The halfwit argument that it has siomething to do with jobs is just a put uop job. The fact is we will probably come out, we will survive and prosper. The car industry won't move anywhere because there will have to asuitable trade agreement with the EU. How could they not enter into one when we receive 50 % more good sfrom the EU thna we export. We can also then, as Farage says, set about making other trade agreements all around the world just as we please, without some undemocratic nany following us about trying to interfere and forcing us to go through 'Euro institutions'.

    If you did not see that CH 4 prog called - Farage, Who are you? ......then see it on Utube or somewhere. It was very enlightening at juts how astonishingly undemocratic the EU is and how it wastes appalling amounts of money. Frankly, I want out. www.youtube.com/watch?v=fV-TbeGoQcs

  17. That's who I will be voting for, they may not win but yes it will send a message to ConLabLibDem that something is not right and the plebs are awakening.

    UKIP are aware of the problems. I know some of these people. They are all starting to say that the total housing policy error is not just about soical housing shortages, not just about upsetting home owners who like the sound of price rises, but they told me that they would argue for policies which deliver lower land prices/ house prices over time. They would be sustained house building measures, more social housing and replacement, caps on borrowing (now that's a first!!!) . They were quite clear that the idea of older wealthise having to fork out for grandchild deposits was a very poor position to be in.

    So I am gonna vote for them in May and the next general election. They can only win a handful of seats for westminster in stronghold areas, but so what, they will put massive pressure on the new govt.

  18. Amazing isn't is? Apparently, if this article is to be believed Estate Agents in the UK are charging up to £750ph. Even if it was £500 ph it is hardly justified. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY NO ONE HAS MANAGED TO STOP THIS BY AN INTERNET/HOUSE SIGN/NEGOTIATION ON YOUR BEHALF PHONE SERVICE. Can anyone explain how E'as manage to survive and persuade most people to sell a home through a shop and internet listing on Rightmove.co.uk. ?


    I really cannot say if the hourly rates quoted are realistic, BUT I can comment on the hourly rates for Lawyers since I am in the trade. Much against media output, the hourly rates for most lawyers doing things in Courts is actually about £50-100ph depending on what it is. Mostly £50ph. That is the fee befor expenses and therefore the turnover and not the profit figure. Only commercial lawyers charge things like £500ph. Out of 110,000 lawyers, about 100,000 of them will be on those lower rates. I know we are not very popular in the media, but most of what you read is simply untrue. Legal aid lawyers earn less than plumbers these days, and they will all leave over time if Grayling cuts it any more.

    The reason you read that major Fraud trials are hanging about without barristers is because Grayling has cut the rates at the snap of his fingers by 30%. The rates he cut have been in force without a rise for 18yrs so far. Yes, I said eighteen years. So, Grayling thinks that some of the most talented lawyers required for large fraud cases will not now get the £150ph they worked for previously but, actually only £100ph. No wonder several trials including a £4.5million fraud are sitting idle because no lawyers will take it on and those originally there walked out before Christmas. Grayling is about to wreck the justice system in this country and it's actually valuable and worthy to have courts running fairly with people represented properly. The Guilty should not go free, but neither should the innocent be convicted. The Prosecution have also been cut beyond the bone and are in a shambles. My firm currently wins 2 out of three prosecutions, when it should be about 50/50. So there you have it. Like us or not, we in Legal Aid are generally not very well paid and the fat cats AMONGST legal aid lawyers, are mostly a myth.

  19. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/22/coalition-plans-child-poverty

    ■ Reducing the typical energy bill by around £50 and extending the warm home discount – currently worth £135 a year and available only to older claimants.

    Already exists: http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/consumer_e/consumer_energy_and_water_supply_e/consumer_energy_supply_e/consumer_help_if_youre_older_disabled_or_on_a_low_income_e/extra_help_with_energy_if_youre_vulnerable_or_on_a_low_income_.htm

    All the big energy companies offer a scheme to help low income people.

    Low income households have to apply by end of January to get cash back.

    ■ Reducing water costs by capping bills for low-income families who are on a water meter and have three or more children.

    Already exists Watersure

    ■ Reducing food costs through healthy start vouchers for young children and an extension of free school meals.

    Already exists - don't kids get free school dinners if they're under 7?

    Other measures include the expansion of free school transport, building more affordable houses, promoting credit unions and introducing a cap on payday lending.


    As usual they just announce things that already exist in soem form or that they have already announced but never introduced. They delicately forget that the cost of living/renting/eating or buying anywhere is rising and has cost most people a lot of more per month. Energy bills have just about doubled in 5 yrs. I was paying about £90pm duel fuel in 2009, now £170pm. I won't qualify for any of the sops mentioned in this article. Not voting for Tory or LibDem OR labour who set us up for a deeper mess than we ever needed or deserved.

  20. Its worse here than in the UK. A negatively geared (loss making) property investment is something to brag about. Properdee price inflation is a religion here

    Yes, it is almost worse than the UK. So called investors can buy residential property and set off losses against their general income tax from going to work! You cannot do that in the UK.

    The Aussies and ourselves are mad to allow foreign investment for the purchase of homes which should be lived in by those who live there. It does nothing to help any of your own citizens and puts up prices beyond the scope of general wages, creating a false market which exists very strongly in central Sydney and London in particular. WE MUST BE MAD. The same applies to second home ownership for holiday lets in the UK - for those you used to be able to set off losses against worked for income. We need properly applied second home taxes to avoid these distortions. We need proper mortgage control over them too. Once again, all that has happend has favoured a few rather wealthy people at the direct expense of the normal working person, ramping up prices and allowing high earners to avoid paying their tax, whilst investing in property and distorting local markets. It has built up over a long period of time. I am no lefty, but do see that the treatment of investment to property has created a massive problems and unfairness in society which is totally unwarranted and entirely avoidable.

  21. Totally agree with your assessment. These people aren't investors. Would someone buy a share with a low and declining dividend which, if that wasn't bad enough you would have to pay a yearly charge subsidising your share, or as these people call them 'investments'!

    As most of us know on this site these price and yield discrepancies show that some sort correction to prices or rents will have to occur. Of course these people are banking on rents correcting upwards! However, what they seems to be missing is that this can't happen unless wages make a big jump to the upside too!

    I agree with the assesment too! We need to sort out our methods of delivering secure social housing; we need to ensure BTL cannot distort the market for FTB and ramp up prices as it does now. The politicians always dodge this subject because so many voters do rent a property or two. We need to amend renting legislation to provide more secure tenancies with rents that cannot be put up just because the market for anothe one round the corner after two years is more. The property does not any longer cost any more and the mortgage is already set up. There should be long term arrangements for those who want to rent privately and behave reasonably. BTL should involve at least a 35% deposit and be a marginally more expensive mortgage than owner occupier. It should not be possible for a group of citizens to squeeze the last penny out of lower paid people so easily. In fact BTL should form a much smaller group of investors. Group investment schemes with sensible long term tenancies as I describe would be better. You can then invest in the Company etc.

  22. Plus, we have it banged into our heads 'democracy' is something good, and not one party has a plausible plan to deal with our addiction to debt. While a party with this as a central theme might get a million or two votes from clued up folk, I cant see it ever forming enough to gain a degree of power.

    To deal with govt debt effectively a large part of the answer can come from leaving the EU. The overall cost to the economy is simply huge. Only one party is for leaving. The rest are fractured.

    We need a party brave enough to explain to those 45 + that their unearnt equity, bearing no relations to wage price inflation, is hampering the lives of everyone who can't buy a home - evene their own children and grand children. We need them to accept it would be better that they do not envisage becoming the bank of mum and dad to provide some absurd deposit to buy a small box which should be half the price. No, it would be better if the oldies equity reduced and the young ones could buy on 2.25 x income multiples. It would be better if the B of E were to stop lending phoney money to banks so that they have NO interest in savers deposits. Currently they enjoy the biggest margins in history if they can borrow at 0.5% and lend at 3.5% etc. The normal margin was 1-1.5% for decades. It would be better to put up base rates gradually and control lending properly. Then and only then can a normal property market resume. We could have two tier rates - one for property and one for industry.

    But the clowns in govt are intent on pump priming and pretending we have a recovery. Mr Carney said only last week that the recovery was NOT BALANCED AND NOT SUSTAINABLE. Correct!

  23. The UK will achieve "growth" of 3.4% in 2014 while the government borrows about 6% of GDP a year. Germany will grow around 1.7% in 2014 while essentially borrowing nothing.

    Saying that the UK is growing faster than Germany is a complete joke.

    Of course! Our growth is partly fake supported only by continuing borrowing. It will not last and will have to be paid for. This is why we experience much greater swings in growth and then recession than Germany. In fact our cycles are getting quicker with the up lasting a shorter time with each move through the cycle.

    Even the Gov of B of E said today that our growth was not balanced and not sustainable. The first correct thing I have heard him say.

  24. This article on China is a REAL WORRY!! We might have thought it would be the US or even the UK that would trigger a global crash when their endless borrowing is found unsustainable - growth falters and the enormous debt can't be managed after all. But this article puts the current focus on the Chinese economy, which simply credit fuelled itself away from the 2008 crisis, but grew a new enormous balloon in the process.

    These articles are a good case for something to blow up somewhere before long. As always, the timing rather than the event is the hardest part to call.

  • 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.