crashbaby

Trump condos are priced for "access to Trump", not market value. The actual real estate is mostly an accounting trick. Donald Trump net worth: I'm worth whatever I feel - Apr. 21, 2011

The implementation needs work. If the flat is not legally rented out (with the registration number communicated to the tenant) then AirBnB did not have a right to take the tenant's money. Just create a streamlined process for the tenants to recover any money spent on unlicensed rentals in Berlin and then AirBnB will be open to the idea of removing them from the site. Companies speak money.

I can't watch the clip as I'm still at work, but I think Carney wasn't campaigning for a public vote. He was just full of it. Lying will never be illegal, but lying in certain circumstances can land you in trouble (e.g. fraud, medical, etc).

Yes, it should be out tomorrow: https://www.forexfactory.com/calendar.php

They're as unaccountable to Brits as Sterling is to Scots. Control is shared among all the people using it, and convincing 28 countries to "print baby print" is not as easy as convincing one. Even if you want to reduce it to the representatives, it's not like Carney/Osborne/Hammond are held in high esteem around here. At least I'm not aware of the EU doing anything like TFS/FLS/etc

Well, when you sell something for debt you lose control over it and they chose to give someone else control. I just with the lesson would catch on already.

I don't think anyone is proposing rent controls as alternative to increasing IR. They're proposing rent controls because the market is broken and there doesn't seem to be much political will to fix the fundamentals.

Have you taken a good look at the arguments there? They seem to revolve around the idea that only the more modest homes are rent-controlled, so landlords invest less in cheap homes and developers build more luxury homes. Strange how it never occurred to the author that maybe all rental stock could be rent-controlled. Oh, and the second argument is that rent controls "ruin people's lives" because going from a rent-controlled flat to a market-rate flat sucks because the market rate is higher. Somehow that doesn't convince me to hate rent controls. It's reasonable to be cautious and explore the consequences of rent-control, but that article is just crap. I don't think rent control is the best solution to the current housing problems, but it would still be an improvement over what we have now.

You seem to be confusing the concept of risk with cost. It sounds like you are willing to expose yourself to risk in order to reduce cost, but that doesn't mean they are the same thing. Financial risk can be described as "willing to lose 200k in order to save 20k". The numbers may depend on location and everyone has their own point where they're willing to risk it, but let's not confuse the two concepts.

That's not what you should be comparing. From the EU point of view, the question is not who is most affected by a 'No deal' but rather, 'Is a no deal better than giving the UK more favourable terms'. If giving the UK better terms would encourage other countries to leave the EU, then no deal is the preferred option. Whether it impacts the UK more than the EU is a moot point. In the end, it comes down to the fact that you can't have better terms outside the EU than inside it.

They both cut interest rates and had some bailouts, but I don't think the ECB had an equivalent for Term Funding Scheme. Deciding to print your own currency and flood the market is easier than convincing 27 other countries they should spend/print to inflate your housing market back home. And whatever they did about it would be more visible and perceived differently (TFS is quite stealthy for the average person on the street). e.g. Spain uses the Euro and had a property bubble: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_property_bubble

Let's not forget the reason why they want to sell the flat in the first place: My first reaction was that some people are incapable of learning, but then again... it's just taxpayer money, so they're probably thinking if the government paid the first time they can do it again.

That's on the way up. On the way down it's 0.88^5 = 53% of the initial price, so 47% down after 5 steps

Sounds like HTB is the main reason why the market is not crashing yet.