Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

godnose

New Members
  • Content Count

    50
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About godnose

  • Rank
    HPC Poster

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Uh, weak. Mathematicians can be wrong. Mathematicians can be racist, believe in flat-earth theories and so on.
  2. It's always the same with you. Honestly, drug manufacturers and dealers are not violent because the government makes them so or because a black market has been created as an effect of prohibition. Drug manufacturers and dealers operate in a world outside of the law (a world you seem to advocate). If there was no government basically all business would be operated like drugs businesses work now. Drug dealers don't love drugs or care about drugs, they just want to run a business and make money fast and with relatively less work. Take away the government and housebuilders, clothing makers, c
  3. Hey, thanks. Yeh I'm thinking about it. There are just a couple of things keeping me hanging on for now. My job is (relatively) quite enjoyable and very interesting and intellectually stimulating work and I know I am one of the lucky ones to have that, my colleagues are awesome, and my friendships and relationships, which took years to make, are excellent. Another option is to possibly head to Europe, Germany most likely, but Scotland is beautiful and it has been tempting.
  4. I have approx £70,000 in cash. Living East-central London. A flat which offers a somewhat liveable situation (~68 sq. metres minimum with 2 bedrooms) would currently be about £425,000 at the low end. I need a 50% drop for such a flat to be £212,500 to have a 40% deposit (£85,000) for it. I can save £1000 per month. So I would need 15 months' more time to save up the extra bit. I think my chances are probably low of this ever happening, but I am the market, I am the demand goddamnit. If they would stop throwing money in, interest only btl mortgages (only works if market is basically a Ponz
  5. Wow i just listened to this earlier while walking around town. BA Linguistics at Machester. MA Anthropology in London.
  6. byron78 gets to the point here, so I needn't rake over it: Thank you.
  7. They are not productive. Their employees are productive. The rich are parasitising their workforce. A worker produces / does £100 worth of work/capital. The capitalist pays them less than that and sells it for more, pocketing the difference. The capitalists live off the poor. Parasites. In addition, we all know on this forum where money comes from, so called "demand": poor people taking on debt. Without the poor the rich would vaporise.
  8. The whole "snowflake" argument / discourse, whatever you might call it, is so lazy, mutton-headed, unfounded and historically ignorant, it's actually depressing and reflects badly on anyone that uses it. People have always pointed out what is wrong with the world. The young (and some not so young) of this world have particular challenges and this is a reaction to that. The challenges are becoming increasingly tough and more are being affected by them. There is perhaps an ever increasing danger that young critical people are going to eventually tackle the issues / those that sustain them and s
  9. No, in that (hypothetical and unlikely) situation with my own two hands and my body and access to the resources of the island, I'd be able to survive with some hard work. But, chances are that island will be owned by a member of the top 0.1% and I would need to pay rent on wherever I chose to live, and equally any land I foraged from or any sea I fished from. Plonk me anywhere in the UK if I eked out an existence like this I'd be trouble with whomever's land I was on. I'd probably be vilified as a new wave of gypsy too.
  10. Yes, and the money taxed was extracted as capital from the workers' labour and hours to begin with. The choice for workers is effectively: work for wages or be homeless and starve. Are they paid or are they victims of entrapment, extortion etc.? The state doesn't swoop in and steal money like a TV from someone's living room. The original "theft" is the employer from the worker. The worker's labour makes x amount of capital, the employer separates the worker from the value of their capital, pays them a fraction of what it's worth and sells it for a handsome profit for himself, that's the fundam
  11. Raise the top rate of tax. Disincentivise vast greed, this will see top salaries come down. For example if everything over £1 million is taxed 90%, the difference in net income from £1 million to £1.5 million is only 50k; far less worth the effort to extract all that extra money from your workers' labours, and far less incentive to seek another higher wage elsewhere. With less capital extraction there is more to go around, more to invest, more to pay workers who are on lower tax bands. Tax was not always about just raising revenues, it's a way of stemming the greed of capitalists and making in
  12. I'm trying to keep it simple here mate! There'll be a gaggle of people creaming off Primark's greatest profits, other head honchos, mostly share holders, I imagine. The point is, that greed at the top is funded effectively through wage squeezes right through the business, i.e. the bottom (much of the middle, whatever you want to call it). Average salary for a sales worker is sub 9k; appalling basically. The government is subsidising big businesses, shareholder value and 1 per-center salaries, by allowing them to pay crap wages. The benefits system though, is benefiting the rich though on
  13. As we all know her on HPC forum, demand (i.e. for housing ) is set by how much money can be delivered to people for them to pay with. Demand in the whole economy (consumer goods, food etc.) is the same, and that's what keeps the super rich afloat. The model may have been to be generous with benefits, but the benefit is to the top 1% ultimately. They have been permitted to screw people with such badly paid jobs, employment prospects, and feeling of worthlessness that people are so poor or won't work, and that ultimately is gonna see the 1% shoot themselves in the foot. If the population stops s
×
×
  • 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.