Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Riedquat

  1. Because it would cause big inflation much quicker than giving it to the banks. By giving it to the banks they just sit on it most of it, feeling rich and laughing at the rest of us. Their problems are gone, it's merely become everyone else's problem.
  2. Even so will it be able to make a significant impact on jobs? What manufacturing we have tends to be pretty efficient. To me it seems to be going the way of agriculture. Efficiency increases massively so the labour required drops to next to nothing, and then people start regarding the whole thing as insignificant (conveniently ignoring the fact that we've got to eat). Agriculture took over from hunting and gathering, manufacturing and industry from agriculture, finance and services from manufacturing and industry. Each time it opened up something new. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be anything new on the horizon to take over from finance and services (and unlike the others it doesn't really do anything useful). Shifting the jobs around the world is just changes the scale and pace of these changes.
  3. Sounds like the sort of thing that should get many HPC regulars up in arms - it's nationalising part of the insurance industry after all. Thought the free market was supposed to solve everything...
  4. WIth prices like that its no wonder that there are people without insurance.
  5. Isn't there a right to privacy in law too?
  6. I tried pointing out to them once that expensive houses getting more expensive was bad. They didn't seem to be able to get their head around that idea, so I doubt they'll manage this.
  7. Unless it turns out that what I made an offer for isn't what's actually on offer - e.g. a survey revealing previously unknown problems. A change in price expectations is neither here nor there. As I said I'd pay what I thought it was worth. What other people think it's worth is their problem. That's one of the reasons I've not even looked in to buying an overpriced house.
  8. Assuming that I still could (e.g. the mortgage offer wasn't withdrawn) then yes. However, if such a drop looked remotely possible in the realistic timeframe of the offer then I would never have made the offer in the first place. If I made an offer at all it would've been for what I thought was a reasonable price, and would regard such a drop as just missing out on getting something dirt cheap - not too galling as long as I still think I got a reasonable price.
  9. I think you're confusing two things here. Most people seem to agree that later relevent information, such as a survey revealing serious flaws, is a justification for the original offer not to be kept to. That's a completely different thing than going back on the offer just because you've decided you don't like what you earlier agreed to, even though nothing else has changed. It's even worse if you never had any intention of sticking to the original offer (i.e. you outright lied in order to manoeuvre the other guy into a situation where you can put pressure on him). That's just outright dishonest.
  10. From the rest of his posts I'd guess it's because he can't believe that anyone won't really screw someone else over for their own gain at every opportunity.
  11. They had an agreement and stuck to it. Good for them. It's disgusting that many here seem to be holding up greedy back-stabbing for your own gain as some sort of virtue. Still, if it's good enough for the bankers I suppose it's good enough for you.
  12. Actually that sounds like a reason to vote Labour to me. Can't see anything getting properly fixed unless it all completely crashes to the ground and has to be re-built from square one, and if it drives out the greedy self-serving scum who helped to build up the mess so much the better (including themselves, with any luck).
  13. The banks were massively responsible of it due to being willing to supply the means for that price to be achieved. Without their complicity neither of those two buyers would've been able to pay as much as they did. The price would still have been determined by who would've paid the most, but the most would've been a lot less (and the willingness to pay top dollar even if they could afford it would've been less without the media- and bank-driven "Buy property" hysteria).
  14. If it was me buying your house and they were 100 watt ones I'd be very grateful to you for doing so. Can't stand dim slow-to-brighten-up rubbish "energy-saving" ones. I bought one recently after a bulb went; it quickly ended up in the spare room so that I could have a light that worked properly in the lounge.
  15. Great, build loads on an already over-deveopled country for no real need. Brilliant plan. You appear to be buying into this myth that there's actually a shortage of housing, instead of a problem of distribution of ownership. A big oversupply is a stupidly inefficient way to adress the problem.
  16. Yes and no - no because the examples he picked (Sky, mobile phone) are two that I don't have and have no desire to have. More seriously "no" because of your "bad for the economy" point. It continuous to worry me that the whole system relies on non-essentials like that to even keep functioning, instead of being nice-to-have luxuries that are great when we can afford them but ultimately we could do without. The big "Yes" though is about your general point about "affordability". "Affordibility" is the nonsense that encouraged people to take out stupidly large mortgages because interest rates were low.
  17. There's nothing unethical about saving money. There is a lot unethical about being dishonest and going back on your word, and being dishonest with someone about your intentions. As much as I enjoy seeing the boot on the other foot against former gazumpers it still doesn't make it right.
  18. Without them we'd have had Soviet soldiers in the streets. Don't just look at the issues of the day.
  19. Cameron is hopeless, but marginally less hopeless than the other options.
  20. Carriers are utterly essential if you're ever going to have operations outside you home waters.Cutting them is madness (as was not making them nuclear powered). Ultimately they're much more important than the Trident replacement. Nuclear missiles aside most of a powerful modern navy involves getting the carriers where they're needed and providing sufficient protection to them.
  21. What failed was losing sight of what it was supposed to be there for. In a reasonably wealthy country like the UK, and despite everything it still is (relatively speaking) should never let anyone in it starve or freeze. What failed was the idea that the state would support you not only if you couldn't find the means of supporting yourself, but also if you couldn't be bothered to find the means of supporting yourself, and good riddance to that.
  22. Terrible news. A big sign that one of life's essentials is getting cheaper. Just have to hope that the government will put up taxes to compensate.
  23. Less building over the country at the expense of smaller houses is a price worth paying IMO. England, at any rate, feels more than overly built-up. Anyway, it's irrelevent to prices if there are still enough. If there's enough shelter then you should be able to get that at a reasonable price if it's not been stuffed by other factors (mostly over supply of credit), you just won't be able to afford as big a one as in some other countries. It shouldn't mean that it's almost impossible to even buy a shed.
  24. That's partially the general increase in quality of living with time, and partially genereal ongoing maintainance, or catching up on the lack of it. If it's the former then there's no reason not to go up with inflation (it's one of the reasons that there is inflation), if it's the latter then it should simply be moving back to a long-term inflationary trend from a period below it caused by being too cheap to do repairs.
  • 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.