peemac

Steve's post is an example of how all privatisation works (and reflects to a tee my own post about 15 posts earlier). Look at something that should have been completely simple, like the privatisation of directory enquiries, a total fiasco.

Actually that's not strictly true. The thing that determines house prices is simply the availability of credit, affordable or otherwise. Have you never heard of (the currently defunct) rental trap?

Well if the government were to deregulate, make RM stand on its own feet and open the market up to any competitors who might also want to deliver mail that would be OK by me. I think it would be a good idea and I think RM would most likely hold their own. If it is privatised though we know from the previous fiascos (particularly the trains) it won't work like that. The government will most likely break up the company into the logistics and the delivery. Regional franchises for the delivery will be sold to the highest bidder, who will in turn want the biggest bang for their buck so will start employing minimum wage agency staff, most likely only delivering every other day, or even less frequently. Because of the franchising and multiple companies, no one will know what anyone else is doing, or supposed to be doing and the consumer will be confused about who does what and for how much. The result? A more expensive, worse, more complicated service than we get now (if anyone can tell me of a privatisation apart from BA where this hasn't happened let me know). Long live Royal Mail I say.

Whoa there, now you're putting words in my mouth. I said it was a sterling service, which it is. I'm not commenting on the quality of their competitors.

I remember that routine, and how true it is. I see why the Aussies call us whinging poms now. If you think it will be better off once there's competition just wait until it's privatised and franchised off. You won't know what's hit you. You think the posties are bad now? Wait till the private companies start taking on agency staff. Royal Mail is a sterling service. Letters, to your door, everyday. Genius. The logistics alone are mind-boggling.

It's not neccesarily just d1ckheads and dossers though. Some kids (particularly boys) just grow up too quick for school and are genuinely ready to go out to work at 14, where they'd be much better off in the company of men who won't take any sh1te off them and learning a real trade. Instead they are stuck in the company of teachers who have neither the time, will, ability or authority to control them, so they just end up running riot and most likely ruining their futures.

There is also a more philosophical issue here, or should I say a cultural one. What kind of society needs the potential penalty of fines and imprisonment to make its young adults lead productive lives? A culturally and morally bankrupt one I suspect. You could also argue that one way to reduce the burden that layabout teens place on the state is to withdraw benefits. We couldn't do that though could we? No doubt these apprenticehips will be subsidised by the state too. This is verging on communist.

This is mental, in fact it's just downright bizarre, beyond bizarre. You can shoplift to the value of £200 and get off scot free, woe betide you though if you don't fancy going to school after the age of 16. The liberal-left policy makers need to climb down out of their Ivory towers and get a serious reality check. Has any of them stopped to think that young people might be getting into trouble because of school, not in spite of it. Let's face it the academic life ain't for everyone. The policy should have been apprenticeships being made available for those who want to leave school BEFORE 16, on the condition that they still attend school part-time. Where the hell is the money going to come from to build all the new classrooms that will need building and employ all the new teachers?

This sums up my attitude to a tee. I'm new to acadaemia (2nd year of postdoc) and you know what - I wouldn't change it for anything right now. Sure the pay's not great and the job ain't exactly secure but I have the absolute pleasure of never going to bed dreading going to work in the morning. That's worth more than money. The culture is good for a young researcher too, working with young bright people (yes they do still exist, despite what some would have you believe), getting my hands dirty ,doing good work and having a laugh with interesting people. Rarely 2 days the same either. The money is there, in fact I was just discussing this with a prof. in our department yesterday. Financially it's never been a better time to be a PhD student and Labour (according to him, and he should know) have put a lot of money into the HE infrastructure. Now I can't vouch for the second point but the year before I started my PhD the stipend was approximately £7k, a final year EngD student now TAKES HOME nigh on £20k. That's not poor by any stretch. The people who really need to catch up are industry. The skills are there to be used, but they won't pay enough to employ the right people and as a result think that graduates are poor. Funny how you never hear of merchant banks complaining of a skills shortage. Nobody doing a PhD is skint these days, and neither do they end up techying, unless they want to. How long ago did you do your PhD? I'd recommend it to anyone with a desire and aptitude for research these days. Good advice on selecting the right lab too, it can make all the difference.

LMAO. Just wait till it's privatised and they've split the logistics and franchised the delivery off to the lowest bidder. You'll be lucky to get another letter through your front door ever again, not without it either a) costing a fortune, or taking 2 weeks Royal Mail is a bloody superb service (agree with parcel force being poor, but tarring them all with the same brush is wrong). Mail, delivered to your door, everyday. If only everything in life was so simple.

This is absolute nonsense of the highest order. What do people think life was like in the 50s/60s? My nan and grandad lived in a single room with 3 children for a time. Life was hard, and I don't mean they had to walk to the shops instead of jumping in the fourbifour, it was HARD. One of my old fellas earliest memories is him and his brother going to the market at closing time to collect empty crates for firewood. Standard of living decreased? Not on your life. Although that's not to say that life isn't considerably more complicated than it was then.

A lot have been sold on already, in fact I thought this was old news. 2 years of mine now lie with honours student loans, whilst the other 2 are with the student loans company ltd. I don't think you'll see an increase in the amount you'll cost to service as the interest rate (as far as I know) is set at RPI. Can someone explain to me how private companies actually make money from these, because I don't really get it.

No. An after event genius is someone who's always a genius after the event. Like me coming on here the day after the FA cup final and telling you I had £1000 quid on the winning scorecast.

Well rather people sticking their neck out and getting it wrong than the rest of the 'after-event geniuses' we have around here. "Ftse down 2% today and the dollar is up, glad I sold my stocks and put it all in dollars yesterday" Yeah, yeah. Whatever

Or there's the other conclusion you could make: Those that don't do well, or in fact don't do at all post that they do. Predicting things like this is just like gambling, yet if you went on to any gambling forum and consistently posted winners after they had already come in you'd be banned within 10 posts.

Black wednesday anyone? FTSE and Dow to dive below 6000 and 12000 respectively tomorrow IMO.

Red across the board again today. To me it just seems as if there's is some kind of stand-off going on. After the initial falls a week or so ago there was a slight upwards movement and then absolutely stagnant since. At a guess whichever way the markets break out is the way they're going to go for a while. My guess is there's going to be sustained falls (A soft landing?)

have a look here. Quite an interesting read actually and covers a lot more topics than Islamic finance: http://www.islamic-finance.com/indexnew.htm

Lloyds TSB definitely do. Also the Islamic Bank of Great Britain, I think that counts as a UK bank.

Yes. That really is what's happening.

Like I said - Do your research beforehand. It's easy enough to get on rightmove and check market value. The one we were looking at was actually slightly below market value according to what we saw on rightmove. If you do part buy and don't believe anyone would want to buy into that type of arrangement in a crash you can always staircase to the full 100% and sell on the open market. This can be done in one transaction with the HA we were looking into. And as for not knowing much about HA my uncle works for one at board level, and he was an invaluable source of information. So yes. I do.

Great post.

eh? Have you ever bought a house? A RICS surveyor is independant. The bank will also have their own survey carried out before they give you any money. If the house its valued at 133% of what it should be your bank are unlikely to give you any money.

Think about why this is in no ones best interest for someone running these schemes to do. Maybe you should actually go and do some research. In many cases part-rent part buy can be cheaper than renting, or buying. That's why people do it. I know this because me and the nag were seriously thinking about one of these before we bought our place. As it turns out my old fella lent me some money towards a deposit and we bought outright.

Conclusion: You don't know what you're talking about. These 'investments' are just the same as any other. Do your research beforehand and you can bag yourself a nice deal. Many HAs that do these schemes sell all shares at market value, as determined by an indpendant valuer. Price goes up you pay more, price goes down you pay less. Sub letting and alterations are allowed, and you don't have any buildings insurance. In a property crash all properties are harder to sell. That's why it's a crash. If you rent you pay 100% of the rent and service charge for a property you own 0% of. You have no security of tenancy and are incredibly limited with regards to decoration and alteration. You also derive no benefit from any fluctuations in house prices (fair enough on the flipside you don't have any exposure to a crash, but you can't deny that the trend is usually to growth with houseprices). If you part buy you have a secure place to live, you can benefit from HPI, you can carry out alterations and reap some benefits of investments you make in the property. Conclusion: Might not be a bad move. How would it if the price is set by an independant valuer? Don't forget you still have to get a bank to agree to a mortgage too.