Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

WideAsleep

Members
  • Content Count

    106
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About WideAsleep

  • Rank
    HPC Poster
  1. I have no idea who sleeps is im afraid. I have already explained to you that I was not labelling your view as irrelevant - if you go back to my initial post it was a simple observation I was making and did not require the additional assumptions you accuse me of including my use of the definition 'game' and my 'being at peace' with the current system. I, nor the current situation we find ourselves in cares for either of those things. It is just noise. Your education is clearly greater than mine, but does my point of view count nothing if I do not use the correct meanings, despite explaining my
  2. Yes I said zero sum equation purely for your benefit there. You didn't like my use of the word game when describing the process previously for one reason or another. The nature of capitalism as an investor in housing is exactly as I described. It is a zero sum game. One must win for the other to lose. Production, the capitalist dream and all that good stuff is currently separate. Please tell me how it is otherwise? What has the current situation with housing in the UK got to do with putting production into private hands? I am not labelling your post as irrelevant. I was trying to express th
  3. Framing it is a game, not framing it as a game. It is irrelevant. As it stands, there are winners and there are losers. Whether I am at peace with this or not is also irrelevant. Its the nature of capitalism. Being in a winning position, be it on the stock market, housing, benefits, whatever you want - its all a zero sum equation. Someone must lose for the other to win. Right or wrong, that is what housing is in the UK. The system is twisted and rigged to the point where I can think of no other word to call it other than a game, it is certainly not a market, and has not been for decades. If
  4. There is a tendency for people to take information on what could or may happen in the future, and through natural bias relative to their situation, present that information as what will happen and proceed to argue the case to others. It is a shame as it can shut down reasonable debate, from which the participants could learn from each other, and instead promotes an environment in which reasonable individuals with certain views are shut out. This is ultimately to no ones advantage.
  5. You cant just accuse socialists of spending other peoples money. The Tories have spent all of my children's and my unborn grandchildren money in the last 5 years by doubling the national debt. We are still running a deficit are we not? You should change it to 'Government's always run out of other peoples money'. Government's who are always trying to buy votes through deficit spending. That is why Corbyn is a problem for them. He is promising to spend us into oblivion and if he gains popularity, the other parties will have to align their own position to win or keep votes. Democracy has the ann
  6. The fact Corbyn is labour leader is potentially a huge problem for the Tories. Whether he wins the next general election or not is irrelevant. Does anyone remember the run up to the last election? It was give away after give away promised by the Tories just to win those last few votes, against the two least popular party leaders in recent history, Clegg and Milliband. Imagine the next election, where we have Corbyn promising the biggest deficit spending spree in recent history (due to his ignorance or disregard for the consequences), promising to renationalise the railways, promising to g
  7. You can be part of winning side of the game and still say think the game is 'totally bonkers', have sympathy for the losers of the game, and wish to change the game despite it meaning you will no longer be a winner. It is an unusual and brave person to think that way though. Not sure that is the case here but you never know.
  8. Two chances to buy the bottom.... I assume you were joking. If not, please understand that you can't buy the bottom in the present, only with hindsight will you know you have done so. If by some miracle you manage it, you will have done it by pure chance and chance alone.
  9. An interesting theory. However I believe that as reserve ratios of deposit to lending the banks can employ, they are in effect lending out no real money at all but instead creating credit. Therefore the renter/saver is not helping to fuel the housing bubble at all, but is merely a bystander, an observer waiting on the side lines, with fingers crossed that when the house of cards comes crashing down, they are still left with their wealth and the opportunities it will bring. It is a gamble to be a saver of currency in a banking system, that is reliant on the repayment of credit lent out into a
  10. You made a troll bait thread? Why feed them? Feed them and they will get stronger.
  11. Three years ago I was all in cash and looking for a house aiming for a 30% down payment. First one I put an offer on, the solicitor found an undisclosed local occupancy clause that meant we couldn't buy it after all. Second house offer we were out bid by someone paying over asking after we had an offer accepted and had set the solicitor working again. Third house we were getting desperate but we were too late with the offer. We offered 6 grand higher than asking but someone was already in the process of buying and the offer was rejected. It was a repossession you see and as it meant more time
  12. Well said. Sooner or later people will learn that gold is in fact money. If this is not true then please provide another explanation as to why banks and governments hold vast hordes of the stuff. I will give you a hint - its not because of 'tradition'
×
×
  • 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.