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 myself? I have attempted to clarify my position but have clearly made the situation worse by introducing more for you to pick apart piece by piece - to what end I do not know. Clearly it is not to understand my original post as is evident by your last post. Being patronising does nothing to help your arguments, only serves as to put up a barrier to further attempts to discussion. 'Super' indeed.
  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 that the things you are trying to add into the equation are not required to understand it. Semantics do not change the situation. What I think of the morality of the affair does not change the situation. Fair enough on the last point. Its just semantics again, I stand guilty and am happy to be corrected.
  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 someone in a winning position recognises it was not their skill or intelligence that allowed them to get to that position, but things outside of their control, and then expresses their distaste of the situation to the point of wanting their position to be changed, is a brave and unusual person. They should be applauded. The more people think the system should be changed, the sooner it will happen. That is to your and my advantage.
  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 annoying characteristic of making them all as bad as each other.
  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 go on a mass house building spree, promising 'peoples QE' (again not realising or not caring for the consequences). All of these things will need to be addressed by the the other parties, who will have to align some of their own policies in an attempt to keep/win votes. It is the one thing you can count on.
  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 housing market, that can only yield a return should those loans be repayable. I do not see logically how a crash in house prices, having such a detrimental effect on the banking system, will benefit those using those very same banks as their savings vehicle. I think it likely that bail ins would occur in a recurrent financial crisis, as it one of the few options still left on the table, and has proven to work in other examples in recent history.
  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 for the repo company they were happy with less money more quickly. Then two years ago I found this site and stopped looking to buy a house. Three times we tried to commit ourselves to a lifetime of debt slavery without really understanding the financial situation beyond 'can we afford it'. We really were those 'just wanted a house' people. Thank god for the good solicitor, gazumper and the repo company wanting a quick sale. I am not as much in cash as I was, mostly in shares and gold. But the deposit is still sitting there keeping up with inflation. I would say though, that it is not the cash, shares or gold that effects my happiness (maybe the shiny gold a little bit). It is being free from soul crushing debt. I feel particularly lucky that I did not take on 5 times my earnings worth of debt to part own an ex council house, even the last one which had quite a big garden.
  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.