Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Bubble Pop Electric

Members
  • Posts

    265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bubble Pop Electric

  1. I don't know if i'd dare, but it would be quite funny if some of you came dressed as your avatars. WaL - you could find one of those bald head things. Shaker could come dressed in Lady's undies (oh sorry - you do this already!) I could get away with the moustache (i'm thinking village people - a yorkshire version). Right freds dead - i do think you'd probably look better dressed as spiderman than a muppet!! I think we'd all need yellow carnations - that would look very funny in a pub - sort of like a blind date gone wrong!!
  2. That's exactly what i thought. What does he do? Any guesses anyone?
  3. It's alright, i was born in kent, but having lived here since i was four, i think i pass for yorkshire citizenship! There is still the southern softy lurking inside me - as i can't take my alcohol. My husband who also uses this forum is yorkshire born and bred, and can take his falling down water quite well! So who else is up for a leeds meet - i know bingley bloke isn't far. Also a Saturday would be better for me.
  4. A bit off topic, but it made me laugh & I think it's following the same crazy path of ignoring the truth & sticking your head in the sand mentality that seems to be prevalent in the UK today. Despite the VI propaganda: We know the economy is far from booming; We know that the housing market has lost touch with reality; We know that the inflation figures being fudged to look lower than they really are; Well now womens clothes have been "economised" too & have fallen foul of the same manipulation as well. The missus went shopping earlier to buy some clothes for the nice weather, & found, to her astonishment, that she could no longer fit into a size 12. Even a size 10 was a bit too baggy. And she hasn't lost an ounce. Thats right, as people are getting noticably fatter, the clothes manufacturers have changed the sizes so that my size 12 wife now needs to buy a size 8 to get something that fits her! According to the shop assistant it's to make people feel better about themselves - D'oh! Do shoppers really have such a limited mentality? As a side issue, has anyone noticed the increasing number of young girls wearing crop tops with a great big beer type gut hanging out for all to see - have they no Shame !!!!! Vicki Pollard is multiplying!
  5. I know exactly what you mean. I work for a Swiss company that sold part of the business for around £17mil, then sold a load of business property in Geneva for CHF 88mil (profited CHF 15 mil). They felt that since they now have no debt & had a huge cash pile that they'd give a very generous payout to the shareholders - & I mean VERY generous (there were only 300K shares issued until they recently did a 4 for 1 - so it worked out at a lot of Swiss Francs per share). However, when it came to pay review time it was the usual "business hasn't performed as well as we'd have liked, we're having to lay people off, be thankful you still have a job & here's your inflationary pay rise." I did really well & got 4% - which is bugger all in real terms. In the UK we had to lose 2 of our 5 staff earlier in the year, the 3 of us left are working like crazy now we've had the staff levels savaged, & thats the thanks we get. Wish I was one of the shareholders rather than the not valued workers. PS Looked up the figures - 29,400,000 CHF redistributed to the shareholders! Workers - Sod all !
  6. Good on you terrified, the very best of luck, I hope you win a nice big fat lump of money out of them. Thieveing EA B*stards (or should that be B'stards - it sounds more upmarket).
  7. What about leeds? Would that be more direct on the train for people down south? I'm up north too! Actually - i think it would be really bizarre to meet you all - similar to when you see people off the radio on the telly, you always have a picture in your mind on what they look like. I always find that really strange. Does anybody actually look like their avatar (apart from ttrtr)?!
  8. I saw an interview in the paper with some chav woman with about 10 kids (virtually all to different blokes) complaining that the council wouldn't give her a new bigger house. When the reporter got there she was still in bed (dinnertime), & she did the interview in her new lacoste shell suit whilst swigging a can of lager. What a fantastic country we live in.
  9. Just to explore those findings in a little more detail: "Lone parent households are more likely to be workless than other types of household, particularly those with children under five years of age." Don't give chav mums free houses & benefits then!!! "Analyses of the characteristics of working-age people living in workless households show that people aged between 50 and state pension age, the long-term disabled, and those with no qualifications are more likely to live in a workless household than other working-age people." No Shit Sherlock !!!!! "The analysis also shows that long-term sickness/disability is the most common reason for economic inactivity among those living in workless households, particularly for those living on their own." So what the BLOODY HELL are they doing here then !!!!! They're not much cop as workers if they're all sodding well suffering from long term illnesses are they !!!!!! Or could it be that incapaity benefits are just too easy to claim & the vast majority are economic migrants!!! So, working on an avaerage family size of 4 (2 adults & 2 children - although immigrant families can tend to be much larger, & assuming they bring their families, which they may or may not), & assuming that only the male looks for work, as is traditional in many immigrant cultures: 10 million immigrants/4 = 2.5 million potential workers. At least 25% of them will be from non working homes, leaves 1.875 million workers, the vast majority on minimum wage. So, we're supporting 8.125 million immigrants to "gain" 1.875 million minimum wage earners, contributing virtually nothing in taxes, all 10 million soaking up public services, benefits (WFTC, child benefit, etc, etc) Just who benefits economically? The taxpayer certainly doesn't, the British worker doesn't. The only people to benefit are employers with a supply of cheap labour.
  10. If only the immigrants who came here actually did go & "do the jobs no one else wants to do," instead of just claiming benefits. Don't believe me? Well try this link then: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/labo..._households.pdf Page 9 is particularly enlightening vis a vis the proportions of workless households (ie, one with working age adults where none of them are employed). Funny, considering all of the employment opporunities that they come here to exploit, how immigrants have by far the highest percentage. How much does that cost in benefits? A few quid per head of the working population in extra taxes no doubt. On that basis I think that the last thing we want or can afford is another 8 or 9 million of them landing here. If we could get all of the lazy a*ses claiming incapacity benefit back to work, then maybe we might be on a par with our hard working Indian friends.
  11. But this is my point exactly. There's always been work to do forever, fun or not. Work is work, just because it might directly benefit you and not envolve money (as it didn't used to do) - doesn't mean it's not work. Employment rules changed everything - for the benefit of the employer. Not the employee. Take people who worked in the mills - before that, they were self-employed in the mill cottages. They work when they want to, had their families working together. Then the mill owners lured families into the mills with promises of benefits, and exploited them. Made the children work incredibly long hours in dangerous conditions. No pay if you were late or sick. You only have to look at the large houses of the mill owners who used to live round here where i live, and compare them to the tiny houses most families lived in that worked for their employers. If the employees had of worked for themselves - it wouldn't have been just one person benefitting. We are locked into this idea that our way of working (for someone else) has always been around and is better. Look at a large company today - like a bank. Employees get a modest salary, maybe health benefits and share options - oh and a subsidised cafe. Then look at the fatcats above - they move your job abroad, and they're sat on a stack of cash. Work is not the problem, unless you enjoy sitting on your behind doing nothing all day, being employed is the issue. It has far less benefits. Of course working 40 hours in an office is not fun
  12. The amount you need to put down to ensure you follow the 3.5x salary rule is rediculous. I worked out to do this we need to save at least 50k for a house, as a 5% won't get us a mortgage to buy a house. It used to be save 5k for a deposit and you're sorted, you have an affordable mortgage. I find that quite frightening.
  13. The bloke who invented work? Surely you mean the bloke who invented employment. We've always needed to work (find food, hunt gather, etc), the problem is when you have to do it for somebody else (especially as it's hugely in favour of the employer). We didn't always work 9-5, i'm sure life was far more enjoyable before the industrial revolution.
  14. Can you define single mum please? My mum became a single mum when i was 13. She was (and still is) a teacher. As far as i know she has never been on the dole! There are a whole array of single mums out there. She brought up three (two younger than me) children on her own, got two through uni - sometimes a family is better off being a single parent one than a two parent one. She's still on her own. p.s we didn't live in a council house, or claim benefits full stop.
  15. Just because it's cheaper - don't make it better. I'm up for supporting local economy, supporting local shops/food. Especially with food - cheaper does not mean better. We drive down prices - that's not always good - you can't keep undercutting. I beleive in paying a fair price for things - if it's a good job done.
  16. Maybe "the easy way out" isn't the correct term. I recently read about career abortions. Years ago back street abortions were a last resort. A friend of mine spoke of how her mum was spat at in the street because she was an unmarried mother, and how her grandmother had turned up to her own wedding dressed in black because she too was marrying someone with whom she had had a child with out of wedlock. I've spoken to many Muslim girls who have boyfriends secretly, and would be in very real trouble - possibly danger if they became pregnant out of wedlock. It would mean having an abortion secretely - no support, even if they wanted the baby. Imagine locking those feelings up inside you. Then i look at people who have abortions because of their job. No major traumas would happen .They just aren't ready to give it up yet. I'm afraid, i am pro-life, and i can't help my views - i was brought up Catholic, and saw the video's etc. No longer is having an abortion just for those who are in desperate situations. It is for anybody who wants one, because it has been de-sensitised. I'm not saying that people who go through abortions don't know what they're doing, or don't suffer emormously. But it's like plastic surgery, more and more people are doing it because it's seen as less of a big thing.
  17. That's the problem. There are a quite a few people i know who have had abortions. Only one of those had an abortion because the baby was so severely deformed on the scan it was unsafe for both mother and baby to carry on the pregnancy. The rest had them "because it wasn't the right time". It wouldn't have been the end of the world at all if they had have had those babies. I had a baby "by accident". It was unplanned. I was horrifed at the doctor's reaction at the surgery who thought i was mad to keep it. Our discussion: Doctor "Well you have three choices: You can keep the baby, have an abortion, or adopt it." Me: "No i have one choice. I'm going to keep it" Doctor (quite annoyed): "Don't you think you ought to discuss it with your boyfriend first?" (He was very happy to keep the baby i have to add and we're now married (four years), been together eight years, and not have two.) I think abortion is seen as an easy way out. I do accept that there are genuine reasons for people needing abortions (incidently i beleive it is quite unusual to become pregnant when you have been raped). I wonder how many women have regretted having an abortion, because they didn't have the right advice or didn't understand the procedure. I think the choices you are given are treated in the same manner, that's certainly my experience - and they're clearly not the same. I was upset at their laid back attitude as if you were chosing between chips or salad in a cafe. No wonder some people appear to take the desicion lightly - it's given to them that way. There is no way i could bring myself to have an abortion.
  18. Thank you Hedi - it's always good to have someone put things in perspective, and you've done that very well. I don't have personal experience to go from because i wasn't old enough to buy a house back then (born '75). It's funny because i've just been having a discusion with a friend (a retired economics teacher) who pointed out to me in the news that the halifax are reporting house prices are going to rise. Was i like a deer in headlights? Did i feel a lull in my heart. No, definately not. I've learned history is repeating itself well and truely, and it's stories like yours, and the headlines on here from the last crash that really back up what is happening. If it's different to last time - why are the same things happening?
  19. I've got nothing against anyone who wants to just knuckle down & get on with life, no matter where they come from, what colour they are, what religion they believe in, or anything else. I don't even blame people for travelling half way around the World to get here. How could you? Let's face it, if you lived in a hut without 2 beans to your name & you heard of a place where you could get a free house, free food, free healthcare, etc, etc, etc, then you'd obviously go - who wouldn't? They're only trying to put food on the table for their kids & get a better standard of living like everyone else. What I DO have a problem with, is that the UK shouldn't be the great place where you just turn up & everything is free. We need to be tougher on who we grant asylum to, & we should make the scavenging indiginous layabouts get of their lazy a*ses & "do the jobs no one wants to" - they shouldn't have a choice. 2.5 million on incapacity benefits - you're 'avin a larf! We simply cannot afford to keep taking on free lodgers at the rate that we are - there's no wonder the place is falling apart. The problem lies fairly & squarly with spineless, self interested politicians who daren't say "no" to any one who even remotely falls into a minority category. This also leads me to my major bug bear. If people want to come here for a better life, they should accept that they're coming to ENGLAND, & they should expect to live like the English do. Not moan & groan & demand that we turn the country into a mini home from home for them. We have our own culture, which forms a part of our own personal identities, & I'm sick & tired of hearing people who've come over here complaining because, essentially, the country is too British.
  20. Sorry, I know a lot of you don't like us, but this is hot from the BNP website: Private landlords who have agreed contracts with local authorities to house asylum seekers could face a nasty surprise in the form of hidden council tax bills. A whistleblower at the Department of Work and Pensions, shocked by the announcement last week that Labour needs to cut 30,000 jobs to save money, has leaked details to the BNP press team which could spell gloom for thousands of private landlords who have let their properties out to local councils for use as accommodation by asylum seekers. Asylum seekers entering the UK are provided with rent free accommodation equipped with all manner of domestic goods that we have listed in the Joint Tenancy Agreement on previous occasions – the full text of the document can be found here. However since 2000 the payment of council tax is not covered and thousands of landlords have misleadingly believed that council tax is paid by the tenant himself or by benefits. Stories are now coming to light of landlords at the start of this financial year facing bills for arrears dating back for the past five financial years to when a change in legislation was effected. One landlord in a London Borough, who raised his concerns with the DWP faces a bill of just over £4,000 in council tax arrears. New advice It appears that many local authorities in England (where the change occurred) have only now, in 2006, been made aware by their external auditors that the change in legislation in 2000 switched responsibility from the tenant to the landlord where the tenant is a registered asylum seeker, thus heralding a wave of demands for unpaid council tax. A solicitor for one of the landlords in correspondence with the DWP makes the point that his client has actually been made liable for the tax retrospectively because the property was let out in 1999 before the change in law and the contract has never been revised. The Law Statutory Instrument 2000 No. 537 The Council Tax (Liability for Owners) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2000, States: From 3rd April 2000 asylum seekers who appear to be destitute will receive accommodation and other essential living needs under section 95 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, and will not be eligible for benefits including council tax benefit. These Regulations provide that the council tax liability for any accommodation provided under section 95, will fall on the owner of the accommodation as opposed to the resident asylum seeker. How many landlords must now be regretting the day they decided to open their doors to those individuals who claim hardship, destitution and persecution, only to be ripped off by the very government which has created Soft Touch Britain?
  21. There's some very sad looking new builds. If i bought one - i'd feel conned. The lack of space, cheap materials. It always makes me wonder why people buy them (sorry if you have one and you love it). I just think shame on the architect and the developer, as their money saving exersizes are so blatent. What really winds me up are those en-suite shower rooms! I watched a program a short while ago (i don't know if anyone saw it), about some people who had moved into a newbuild townhouse, and couldn't fit their (normal sized) furniture in. The developers said they should have looked at the dimensions, and that the houses (family homes), were designed for the contemporary minimalist look. I had an ex who woked in an architects office several years ago, i remember him saying, when they worked on new builds they had to fit as many in as possible. The only ones i quite like are the environmental ones, they are quite individual, different and they don't look like they've been done on the cheap.
  22. When there were hundreds of credit card sales people on the streets a few years back (you don't see them now). I was accosted by one. He asked me if i wanted to apply for a credit card. When something like this happens i usually think of an excuse so that they'd drop me like a hot potato. So thinking i was really clever i said "i'm really sorry i'm unemployed". Ha! I thought you won't be able to get away from me fast enough. But the smug look was soon wiped of my face, and a look of horror appeared as he said "That's okay madam, you can still get a £500 limit.!" Gobsmacked!
×
×
  • 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.