Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

TryingToWin

Members
  • Content Count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TryingToWin

  • Rank
    HPC Poster

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. This. This is the approach. I blame the lefts hatred of the natural order. There is a natural form of population control in all species. Starvation. I have a theory that the more you subsidise something, the more you encourage it. Stop the welfare gravy train, Stop subsidizing single parent mothers. Stop the aid to starving countries where people are having 10 kids. We have a situation where humanity is actually regressing because reasonable people have 2 kids and then subsidize retarded people so they can have 10. Let nature take its course. How hard would it be to get my simple program through parliament: Mandatory Contraceptive implants for welfare recipients. The tech is there, I don't know why it's not being used.
  2. Why would I want to reduce my days? I want to increase my hours. Bloody mortgage rules where I cant borrow 270k because I cant "afford" to repay it because I don't earn 60k. Yet my rent costs the same as the mortgage payments. ARGHHHH.
  3. What I don't understand is why anybody would incorporate the actual buildings themselves? Just setup a "Management Company" - Let to the "Management company" for the monthly interest costs only, then the company sublets. Then there is no personal tax to pay only corporate tax on the profits the management company makes, but you get to keep the assets in your name??? This totally avoids the change of ownership, while allowing the company to pay tax on the profits instead of the individual. Am I missing something??? This is the kind of crap google and co. are doing.
  4. Yea they are called HMOs and studio flats and they used to be for students to get a feel for living away from mum and dad. Not for filling full of Romanians or couples working 2 jobs just to pay the rent on a single room. The immigration system and welfare system are the problem. The young people have been totally demoralised into voting against their own personal interests. its crazy. Costa coffee used to be full of college kids who wanted part time work. Now its full of EU citizens. all the entry level and unskilled part time jobs our kids used to do are now being done by adults who are happy to do it because its double he wages "back home" chaos
  5. So why don't we remove the money from the equation and just give them "Energy cards" and "Food Cards" that allow them to buy Tesco value goods and pay their energy costs directly. Remove all the money from the equation, you know, so they don't spend it on the latest iPhone. and WHY do unemployed people need to be housed in London? Nobody can ever explain to me why unemployed people need to be housed in the most expensive most densely populated city in the UK? Pensions account for 110million / year . Benefits account for 150Million. The data is all available on the ONS and gov.uk websites. I don't know where you got your figures but the cost of paying for the scroungers is costing MORE then paying the pensions of people who have contributed to this country for 50 years. This is unacceptable. The whole liberal mantra is a lie. They import people with no savings and no qualifications then claim there is wealth and income inequality. They import more people a year then bedrooms they build - and then blame the rental market. No, there isn't millions of homeless, instead there's millions of studio flats that used to be 2 bedroom flats and millions of British Children with British parents who find themselves having to compete with more and more people so big business can have more customers to sell their crap to. Economic Nationalism is the only way out of this mess. But the liberal mantra is that we can save the whole damn world - "I'm sorry - we're full."
  6. The British barely have replacement birth rates. If Britain contained only British for the last 50 years every 2 parents would leave an average of 2 children their inheritance. Wealth inequality would not be a thing. House prices would remain stable or even decrease as the population stayed the same but houses continued to be built. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36271390 The official net migration figures are over 2million every 5 years. The houses built are less than 700,000 every 5 years. an extra 1.3million people competing for housing every 5 years. The unofficial NI numbers add an extra 1.2million NI numbers every 5 years. 3.3million People competing for 700,000 Houses .. EVERY 5 Years Since the financial crash 6.6million extra people competing for 1.4million homes. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2016/jun/22/housing-benefit-cost-claimants-single-mothers 5million people on housing benefit receiving an average of £500 per MONTH. Over 50% SINGLE MOTHERS. 150 BILLION total spent on benefits - 50% of the population on some sort of state benefit - An average of £5000 per citizen per YEAR. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Our own wages are subsidizing the same people we are competing with for housing to the tune of £500 a month and people think interest rates increasing the mortgage costs by £50 is gunna change anything. How naïve. stop the immigration of people with no savings. stop the housing benefit. It all goes away within a generation.
  7. This is a big part of the problem. Until the government realises that subsidizing single parent mothers creates more of them, its a road to nowhere. My advice is to never get married, get your girlfriend up the duff, don't go on the birth certificate and get her on the Universal Credit gravy train. She never has to work again spending 100% time with your kids and all of your rent is 100% paid. Get your tax money's worth however you need to, play the broken game too until they fix it mate. ---------- The people worrying about AI don't seem to realise that any broadcast signal can be spoofed, no level of encryption gets around that. Hell we saw it in the Turkish attempted coup of 2016 . Erdogans plane spoofed a commercial airliner and the military coup failed because they were unable to shoot it down in case it was a passenger plane. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/president-erdogans-jet-disguised-itself-as-civilian-aircraft-to-vanish-from-turkey-rebel-jets-radar-a7148051.html
  8. "Ciizens income" lol. You mean taking the total sum of benefits / welfare paid out and rather than dividing that by the number of welfare recipients. Divide it by the total population? You think this will make the gap between rich and poor go smaller? lol the scroungers pushing Citizens income are the turkeys voting for Christmas. As a 40% taxpayer I say bring it on. scrap all the welfare and do the citizens income. give less to the single parent mother of 5 and give more to me. It wont make the gap between rich and poor get smaller, but it will sure as hell make things fairer.
  9. It sounds almost like the problem is migration. It sounds almost as if the problem is the increasing population and nothing to do with landlords but the increasing competition for housing. We like to pretend that if BTL disappeared that somehow it would change the fundamental dynamic of "who wants it more pays more" regardless of what it is and what they intend to do with it. hmmm.
  10. So 22.. Hmmm. So he's only had 4 years and he's got 3 ... hmmm. Kinda doesn't fit the narrative of all the "its been impossible since 2012 because of HPI" people. Something tells me that this 22 year old is going to be fine no matter what happens. Doesn't have the victim mind set. A winner.
  11. That's a really nice post. I can understand your position a lot better. I may be going a bit off topic here: I just don't know if I agree with the concept of "entrenched inequality" in a world where everyone dies. Even if a guy was to end up with all the property in the UK, when he reproduces with a stranger he has now essentially shared that wealth with someone outside of his family tree and also his child. The very nature of reproduction means that every persons wealth is split up among the populace over and over again. Personal wealth is always divided down. By the state at death. By marriage Or by reproduction. The problem the UK and a lot of the developed world is having is it is introducing millions of foreign citizens into that equation and now the land is dividing down into a much larger pool of people. That and modern medicine making people live much longer has created a squeeze on this generation. If the population stayed at a constant level, the quality of life would only ever go up as technology does. That's my theory anyway.
  12. The price of everything changes based on supply and demand. Food, water, housing, electronics, Cars. I can't think of anything that isn't constrained by Earths finite resources and rising population. It sounds almost as if your making a MORAL argument about housing. When everything is in limited supply, literally EVERYTHING. Which is really weird when you think about it because you guys are the ones claiming and hoping prices can fluctuate downwards while complaining about it only ever going Upwards. It just seems to me people are trying to make it into a question of morality when it clearly isn't. You cant say IO loans are immoral if your satisfied with them when the interest rates are 15%. You cant say the price of housing fluctuating is immoral , if your satisfied when the price goes down. A bunch of lads simply complaining that the horse they didn't bet on won. and to clarify. Everything is a gamble, even crossing the road to go to the corner shop. Nothing in life is guaranteed. But if you don't play, you wont win, that's for sure.
  13. Dude we are all strangers on the internet. You don't need to deflect from the fact you were absolutely wrong in your definition of fraud. You incorrectly believed "intentionally breaking terms and conditions" constitutes fraud, not recognising that breaking any contract is not fraud if all parties are informed. That is literally the purpose of the consent to let form. to request to intentionally break the original mortgage agreement. They don't even actually need to agree to the consent to let, just the function of informing them of a material change covers your **** from accusations of fraud, what they decide to do with that information after that is their decision, normally they just say "Yes you can rent the property, just don't have multiple tenancies". I guess I'm saying its OK to be wrong, you don't need to double down, nobody benefits from that. You are correct in your second point though now that I think about it. Given the chance to "balance things" the government will always do so in a manner by which they earn more rather than less. Thanks for that, that makes sense.
  14. What paperwork? What agreement? With what lender? What breach? What terms and conditions? What are you talking about? Fraud requires deception, its a literally prerequisite, its in the literal definition of the word. An informed party cannot be subject to fraud, hell even breaching a contract does not constitute fraud if the other party is informed. Put the bong down Mr internet solicitor and go outside for a bit, some fresh air will do you good. I'm sorry I know I shouldn't be rude, but, that comment with the double "Yep" to yourself is the craziest thing I've ever read on here, lol. So why don't you push for the interest deductible on Owner Occupiers? Why the race to the bottom rather than the top? Both would achieve the same level of "fairness"? Isn't this just another case of the have and the have nots?
  15. Capital appreciation is irrelevant. because the price of everything is constantly changing. The price of my jeans goes down, the price of my house goes up, the price of gold gone up, the price of electronics going down. Nobody forces anybody to invest in particular things and the price of everything fluctuates, but it is all purchased with your or your kin's time (labour) which also happens to have no fixed value either. You could say the value in pounds has changed, but the amount of time your family spent working to pay for each thing is fixed, therefore taking any part of it is taking some of my/their time. If you subsidise irresponsible parents you get more irresponsible parents. if you subsidise single parent mothers with welfare, you get more single parent mothers. Its almost like the government wants to take away all consequence of poor decision making when it comes to the family unit. Which will lead to more people making poor family decisions. I don't even think about the double tax argument. I just ask myself the question: "Will this policy deter or encourage responsible behaviour when it comes to giving children the best start in life". Why do you deserve it? Well Its not so much that you deserve it as I can't justify why I should take it from you and give it to someone you've never met instead of your own children. There has to be some sort of function in society that makes people want to excel above each other and I cant think of any more compelling drive at a social level or a genetic level than your own children's welfare. Can you?
×
×
  • 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.