Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

pootle

Members
  • Posts

    2,040
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by pootle

  1. But murder is the initiation of force! You would have him thrown out for doing nothing! ...and nice shifting of the blame ... "I elected these people but refuse to accept the responsibility" If you hold that line to be true then those on benefits, who do not pay any share, have no right to live in the territory either. There is no implicit contract. None! It doesn't exist. Your rights do not stem from a (non-existent) contract. NOBODY has ever asked me if I want nukes in this country or not. NOBODY! All you are doing by following this line of argument is showing what a shower of shite "democracy" is in this country. As for implicit acceptance of a mythical contract. I still haven't seen it and I certainly haven't agreed to it. You keep conflating an initiation of force (murder) with complete inaction (ignoring a non existent contract). The humans that force it to the pass are the ones who seek to control the other humans for their own ends, not the humans who want to live peaceably side-by-side with their neighbours.
  2. You'd wonder though ... after all something changed their minds. Perhaps all the talk from politicians and mortgage sellers and estate agents shouting how the stamp duty cut was going to reinvigorate the housing market? Look to be honest with you, I don't think that was the reason - but as doccyboy pointed out, we've witnessed some of the most deluded behaviour ever seen in this part of the world in regards to house prices, so it really wouldn't surprise me (not even a tiny bit) if they did bump the price back up as a result. My point though is that this "initiative" is an election gimmick. In as far as it helps any buyer it is dwarfed by the falls that we can see happening in the market: ADDRESS LATEST % CHANGE PRICE CHANGE CURRENT PREVIOUS TOTAL % CHANGE 47 The Quay, Killyleagh, BT30 -31.0 -65,000 145,000 210,000 -40.8 12b Huntingdale , Ballyclare, Antrim, BT39 9XB -28.6 -84,000 209,950 293,950 -28.6 54 Springhill Manor, Magheralin, Co Armagh, BT67 0UB -18.4 -45,000 200,000 245,000 -40.3 If these price drops don't make houses affordable for FTBs what good is a stamp duty holiday?
  3. Is this a sign of what sellers think of the stamp duty tax break? http://www.propertynews.com/brochure.php?p=TRBTRB45671 Initially listed on 17/01/2009 for £355, 000 Price dropped on 20/03/2010 to £250, 000 STAMP DUTY CUT ... BACKPEDAL! BACKPEDAL! Price up on 25/032010 to £285, 000
  4. I see no contract, show it to me. Anyway, I'm not paying myself an income, I'm exchanging a thing I own for another thing. Does owning a thing imply a contract? Again, show me the contract or it doesn't exist. Yes, the initiation of force is when someone took the kettle without paying. Otherwise it would have been a consensual exchange! Here, when I sold the goods it was another consensual exchange. The only contract was between me and the person with whom I exchanged the goods. There is no other contract and no force involved ... until the government comes along a demands a cut. It was a free exchange without force until the government arrived. I didn't try to tell you the failure to keep an implicit contract was the start of the use of force. I think you misunderstood me when I mention taking the kettle - it was clear that I was referring to taking the kettle without paying. That is the initiation of force. Buying a kettle (rather than taking it) is a voluntary exchange - no force involved. There is no implicit contract in buying a kettle - one thing is exchanged for another, end of matter. A bold claim to say that it is moral. On what principles do you make this claim?
  5. pootle

    Gas Bills

    NO! You are NOT paying for anything that you haven't used. Going back to your original post (or the thread sub-title), there seems to be a misunderstanding about whether gas and electricity are metered or estimated. BOTH are metered. When you move in you have to sign a contract with the utility companies - part of that is telling them what the meter readings are at the point you take possession of the house. You are not liable for anything used up to that point. On a continuing basis you are only liable for the gas and electricity you actually use (as measured by the meters). You may pay estimated bills, but these will always be reconciled to actual usage on a (normally) yearly basis. As pointed out by Ride_on, if you pay by monthly direct debit then what they do is look at where you live and who lives there (i.e. number of adults, kids etc). They then estimate your usage based on the average usage for a similar sized place and occupancy. They then debit you based on this avergae figure. If you use less than the average then you will get money back from the company at the end of the year, but if you use more than the average then you will have to pay extra at the end of the year. If you keep an eye on your actual usage (based on your meter readings) and feel that the estimate is wrong (either too high or too low) then you can request an adjustment to your monthly payments so that no year-end adjustment is required.
  6. Not sure where to start with this whole post so I'll stick this point. If I don't take a job, but grow things and sell them (i.e. my own property) where is the implicit contract to pay the government anything? That's right, there isn't one. I'm not forcing the government or anyone else to do anything. There is no force involved until the government come along and put a gun in my face. As for the rest of it, you've just gone back to "if you don't like it, fook off or we'll chuck you in the clinker".
  7. The initiation of force is the taking of the kettle without paying. The gun in the face is the response. The gun in the face is a consequence of the force initiated by the person stealing the kettle - their choice! When you pick up one end of a stick, you move the other end too. You can't equate a concious choice to pull into a parking space (that you know belongs to someone else) and implicitly agreeing to their terms of use with being born into a geographical region. Where is the implicit contract in being born? Where is the choice? You are describing a state in which people are born into bondage, of being born into a non-consenting contract that they had no knowledge of and no capacity to agree to. EDIT TO ADD: By being born? That's what we are talking about here. Not buying kettles, or pulling into a parking space (things done by choice).
  8. Wrong! You would initiate force against those who have done you no wrong in order to make them comply with your wishes. Not all systems work in this way.
  9. pootle

    Gas Bills

    Sheeeeeeeet! That's mental!
  10. Should anyone ever doubt the truly barbaric and hideous truth under the facade of [caring socialism, just read this confession
  11. The daughter's friend's right to live in the house and use the living room comes from paying rent. That right cannot be circumvented by a group of others who impose a certain lifestyle choice. Injin's right to live here comes from the fact he was born here and your system of state has no right to circumvent that. On a separate note, from what I know of Injin, it is a misrepresentation of him to claim he wants it all without paying for any of it. He would be the last person here to take anything without justification that would disadvantage someone else (as strange as that might sound to you).
  12. pootle

    Gas Bills

    Gas, like electricity, is metered at the point it enters the house. So when you move in, take a reading off both meters and provide them to the supplying company. After that they will try and take meter readings - if they can't take a meter reading then they approximate the reading or leave a card asking you to phone them with a reading. Either way, they will eventually take a verified reading and they will know exactly how much you have used. If you provide them with accurate interim readings then you won't have a nasty shock of having to stomp up more cash because you have underpaid.
  13. Builders? Are they the only one's selling houses? This isn't a first-time-bought-house incentive What happens to affordability when the prices increase by another 2%? First time buyers are back in the same position. What happens when prices increase by 10%? First time buyers are in a worse position by the tune of 8%. Should the government step in and give FTB's an 8% grant to buy a house because it makes the house affordable again? What effect would giving them this 8% have on the effect of house prices? Would they fall, stay the same or rise? The answer lies in normal economics - increase the supply of money and the price rises. We can see this to be true for the housing market because as more credit was made available for house purchases the prices went up and when the credit was restricted prices went down. This is an election gimmick. Personally I think the government should butt out of the housing market entirely and let things take their course.
  14. You have to be careful to define "compel" in this context. It can refer to several things, for example, if I grow eggs and need shoes then I am compelled by my need of shoes to facilitate an exchange, however, the exchange of eggs for shoes at an agreed exchange rate is itself a free exchange between consenting parties. My participation in that market is driven by my own needs. If the government comes along and insists that I participate in it's egg-for-shoes scheme and sets the exchange rate then it is no longer a free market because the actual exchange of value-items (i.e. eggs and shoes) is controlled by a third party (the gubermint).
  15. The problem is that, with a very few exceptions who are already in the process of buying, it doesn't help first time buyers! I explained it 10 or so posts back.
  16. Why do you think that is the only choice a "civilised" society has to offer? "Obey our every command or fook off into the wilderness!" Hardly seems very civilised.
  17. I don't think Traktion has a problem with contributing - it's just that he wants choice. Isn't choice one of the great political mantras that Labour have been chanting for the last 13 years?
  18. I prefer to see myself as a rational realist I stand by my analysis!
  19. Yet it exposes the implicit flaw in your argument. Your premise is that increased wages equals improved buying power when it clearly doesn't.
  20. I think this is a disingenuous reply as it ignores the economic principle behind wages and prices. The point libspero was making was that wage rises do not equate to an increase in the standard of living.
  21. Hello there PP! Indeed, I've been rather busy with other stuff. Still keeping tabs on the economic lunacy of those who would have us worship them ... wow, I really did just refer to Gordon Brown in his preferred plural!
  22. It only really helps FTBs who have currently agreed on a price and are in the process of buying. For all future sales the prices the sellers are asking for will just go up to absorb the benefit. FTBers will pay the same as before and the sellers will get the extra cash from the tax break. However, not many FTBers (or anyone else other than current sellers) will realise this and so it is seen as the nice kind government trying to help people get on the property ladder ... nothing to do with the election, oh no not at all! That's why the measure they are using to pay for this (double stamp duty for £1M+) isn't coming into force until 2011 ... nothing to do with the election, oh no not at all!
  23. In a word, no. It's jut taking a breather before going further down.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information