Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Pindar

Members
  • Content Count

    4,799
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Pindar

  • Rank
    HPC Senior Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

625 profile views
  1. Yes, anybody I disagree with is guilty of manipulation. Unilever was against Brexit, does that mean Brexit is bad (by your logic I mean)
  2. Oh goody, price gouging in the north too. Northerners had housing that reflects local wages. Can't have any of that now can we?
  3. In other words, we (i.e. us Eton types, champagne socialists living in fashionable areas and our political buddies and network of financial parasites in the City) think that only us big boys with the right connections should be allowed to reduce our tax burden. Ye naughty little peasants have no right to not give away one third of your income to help me and my elite buddies swell our coffers. I wonder what the figure is for Amazon, google and Microsoft's "tax arrangements". I would hazard a guess that "reform" of their taxation would yield somewhat more than a measly £1.2 billion. That doesn't even cover one installment for the next bank bailouts. Yes, IR35. I remember it well. The Blair government realised that the proverbial pole wasn't greasy enough so it thought it a great idea to close off a small loophole, which, in comparison to corporate tax dodging and bank bailouts is a drop in the ocean. I love that word "synthetic". Synthetic like the words that fall out of the mouths of these corporate leeches and duplicitous politicians.
  4. Britain is always ahead of the game when it comes to technology. Electric vehicles are no exception...
  5. Apparently having an income of 40k and no mortgage is no indicator of taste. I mean, pink dayglow sweaters and white jeans died with the 1980s didn't they?
  6. Good grief, I hope they have more bacofoil and plywood in stock at the local B&Q. The design is a slight improvement on the bungaloids of the 60s and 70s but really, 800, 000 😕
  7. Great, so now you can shower and take a s**t at the same time. Human farming becomes more industrialised by the year. Roll on Hong Kong cage-style living.
  8. Queen May has made a personal pledge to get out more in her fluorescent bodice and said earlier "let them eat BTL". In a statement to the Daily Smearer, she outlined proposals that would see potential home buyers get the opportunity to purchase a heavily discounted government portacabin with only one previous owner. She declined to comment on where the units could be sited but hinted heavily that a large stretch of land was available near J4 of the M25 which offered both convenient access to London's main orbital and a good view of her husband's golf club.
  9. Pindar

    What If The 99% Refuse To Work & Consume?

    Won't it mean that the whole economy adjusts to a new baseline (market forces and all that) and prices rise commensurately with the availability of money? You would still need to work to afford any luxuries or leisure pursuits and most likely end up living a subsistence life with only basic needs taken care of. The government already subsidises employers and landlords massively through the tax credit and housing benefit systems respectively. Universal income would just mean that everybody took the same amount from the pool of (dwindling) public money, which in reality comes from the taxation of said public. Where's the money going to come from when nobody is paying tax?
  10. A pokey kitchenette with expensive appliances seems an odd place to store furniture.
  11. Of course the Independent employs somebody full time as an "unflattering photograph executive" it's amazing what you can extract from freeze framing videos all day long.
  12. That is a typical metropolitan elite view. It is also blatantly the opposite to the truth which is that mass unskilled migration via EU membership has hurt the least privileged in society. Your position is disgusting because you would rather see people suffer than to admit that your political beliefs are wrong and have not served anybody's interests except the super wealthy.
  13. The problem is there's no proper regulation of building and it's all about profit. Markets can deliver decent housing if they're properly regulated. All the time there's such a cosy relationship between the government, its MPs and the builders' cartel, nothing will actually change. All the time there is a rich elite that owns most of the land and regards the average punter as vermin, I don't see any hope for decent affordable housing for everybody. I believe the NIMBY's are being used to make a point, albeit for all the wrong reasons. The idea is to cast the provision housing as bad and environmentally damaging in order to maintain the status quo. That's what the BBC does, it is the mouthpiece of the vested interests and "environmentalists" whilst doing precious little to address the real problems. It's simple misdirection. Make it all about "destroying green belt land" and divert attention from the fact that there is almost zero regulation of house building - this is evident in the number of recent cases where brand new houses are literally falling apart after a year with no hope of redress for the owners. The real villain here is high land prices, archaic planning laws and a "light-touch" regulatory regime. This is a recipe for decreasing standards of living, particularly as our rulers seem hellbent of drawing more and more people into the country, regardless of the effect this has on infrastructure, housing, schools, hospitals yadayadayada. What's bad for ordinary people is good for the already obscenely rich. Same old story unfortunately.
  14. The elites don't want any building in the provinces - that's why the BBC makes this sh*te about the offended, placard waving residents "up in arms". The whole idea, if you want to know what's planned is to watch "The Hunger Games" and then you'll understand.
×

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.