Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Uncle_Kenny

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,317 profile views
  1. From the article: Why don't they just buy shares in British Land, Landsec or Segro? all FTSE 100 companies. Perhaps they feel the need to do something clever to brag about at dinner parties.
  2. Hmmmm, if only there was some way to peacefully mitigate conflict between neighboring and competing groups? Oh wait! How about national borders?
  3. According to www.listentotaxman.com, even if he earns £20k he is only paying £2863.36 a year in income tax and national insurance. I think its absurd to question whether or not an immigrant on £20k with a kid in school and rent paid by tax payers could possibly be a net contributor. Never the less I did the calculation for you regardless. Maybe your paying to much attention to the Eddie Izzards of this world.
  4. Yes, but at what cost? A housing unit is occupied that would otherwise be free. A school place is being taken that would otherwise be free.
  5. He would make more money for far less no work by buying a million quid worth of shares in Royal Dutch Shell.
  6. Yes, I think this is the biggest cost to high house prices, very hard to settle down and have a family if you don't have a house. Sometimes I think it is a conspiracy to undermine the family and so strengthen the power of the state over our lives.
  7. Me and my wife are unable to conceive children and we are both devastated by this. The only consolation is that when we are old we will still care about each other. Imagine being in your forties and not having a family of your own. Hell on earth if you ask me. Your fancy pants management consultancy, investment banking job won't give a flying f about you when you are old.
  8. If the socialists want to help the environment, then they would be opposed to immigration.
  9. Some human activity can cause the climate to cool, other human activity can cause the climate to warm up. The earlier references to global cooling (1970's) are real. Aerosols released into the atmosphere do have a cooling affect, therefore, humans do have a cooling affect on the atmosphere. The first quote about an ice age I believe is taken from Time magazine, it's not a scientific statement. http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914,00.html This brings us on to another point, newspapers, websites, youtube videos and so on are not science, however high brow they are. You need to go to peer reviewed scientific journals to get valid scientific discoveries. Human activity also causes come warming effects, specifically the release of greenhouse gases like CO2 and methane. The net effect is a warming of the planet, the effect of the greenhouse gases is greater than the cooling effect of the aerosols. To complicate things further, there are natural changes to the climate not caused by human activity. Think of this as natural global warming or cooling. Therefore, it is possible for the world to cool down whilst human activity is causing global warming simultaneously. There are a range of natural effects on the global temperature, for example volcanic eruptions which can't be forecast in advance, natural fluctuations in the power output of the sun and so on. To further confuse people, some part of the world can actually cool as a result of global warming. The British isles are much warmer than other parts of the world at the same latitude, for example parts of Siberia are further south than Britain and are buried under several feet of snow pretty much year round and are totally inhabitable. Britain is unusually warm because of the presence of the gulf stream flowing from the Caribbean to the British Isles. Global warming could possibly disrupt the gulf steam which will result in a net cooling of the UK. Nevertheless, the overall net effect on the planet is that the world is getting warmer even if some parts are getting colder. The scientific consensus is overwhelmingly of the view that human activity causes global warming and that the warming is happening. The consensus would likely be even more one sided if it wasn't for the affect of corporate lobbying. The quotes you have re-posted here are very misleading. These are not scientific statements. Many of these are likely written by journalists. For example, forecasting a future world war is not a scientific thing to say. You did get one thing right though, the science is settled.
  10. Carbon dioxide emissions are way down in the United Kingdom from their highs but of course globally they increase all the time. https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/emis/tre_uki.html No one is prepared to change their lifestyles. One of the protest leaders who was interviewed on Sky was exposed by Guido Fawkes as traveling to Pisa, Italy, taking a skiing trip and walking along palm tree lined beaches, yet he proposes that air travel only be used in emergencies. I suspect the protestors view majority non white countries like the ones you listed as victims and so they will not criticise them.
  11. It's just made up nonsense. All these forecasts are, like that oil will rise by 6.2% or the economy will grow by 1.4% The predictions are always wrong, yet they keep churning out more.
  12. Inequality is not uniquely a feature of capitalism. Stone age tombs also show a similar distribution of wealth as we see today. Some contain millions of pounds worth of gold (in today's money), most contained just a few trinkets, just as today the median persons wealth is nothing more than a car and a few trinkets, furniture a couple of grand in the bank and so on. Nothing has changed. Millionaires still existed in the stone age. Inequality is mathematical. Just as a small minority of stars accumulate most of the hydrogen and the vast majority of stars share the remainder. Once a star accumulates hydrogen, it's gravity attracts more, just as is the case with human beings and money. The distribution of star size is the same as the distribution of wealth. The board game monopoly illustrates this quite well. One person ends up with all the money, or rather the distribution of wealth in the game becomes so skewed that the other players drop out as it is hopeless/pointless to continue. What happens in the real world, is that a similar dynamic unfolds as we are seeing now. Wealth becomes more and more concentrated and people stop playing the game, see the yellow vests, brexit, trump, french revolution, peasants revolt, communist revolutions, Jeremy Corbyn and so on. The current surge in violent crime is often analysed in the media as a policing problem, I see it more as a wealth distribution and house price problem. I once suggested that affordable house prices would likely see many fewer British passport holders become Jihadi terrorists. I was smacked down immediately and accused of undermining the forum in the eyes of the outside world. I think they were afraid my comment would be picked up by other forums and main stream media. If left unchecked for to long, some cataclysmic social upheaval may be required to restart the game.
  13. If you don't pay taxes you will go to jail, resist and they will kill you. Yes, you are threatened.
  14. No, the primary economic unit is the family, not the individual. People work and save so their children can have a better life. Paradox of thrift, but it isn't a paradox at all. Money saved is not simply gone from the economy. It is likely invested into the economy via the financial system. People save to spend their money later on in life. The money will be spent eventually, and when it is, it will be worth more.
  15. Do you understand that people save money in order to spend it later? All income is eventually spent, saving just defers it.
  • 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.