Cogs

If they are academics they would have been 25 before they were being paid more than 7 grand a year, at which point one year contracts begin starting at 16,800 a year (more like 18,600 now, but I'm their contemporary and that was I got after much arguing). The option to do as you did and save 50k in under 8 years was not available to them. They took a decision certainly but it wasn't to spend, spend, spend.

I'm very confused by this. I'm sure about a month or two ago the banks claimed that deposits were increasing and that people were saving more? Did I imagine this or does anyone else remember it, was deffo mentioned here. It was taken as an indicator of people batoning down the hatches etc. [Maybe this explains it]

I noticed that as well, FWIW and for better or worse, I think Gordo is damn serious about his housing plans. The thing to remember here is that Blair thought housing was a boring subject, he wanted to be hopping on and off planes rushing around saving the world. But for Gordon, who wrote a PhD thesis on the pre-war Labour party, I think there is a good chance he considers housing as probably the sexiest subject around. Politicians, like Warren Buffet, only really care about stuff they can understand on a basic level. You may ask me to explain why he hasn't really looked like this in the past, scarily I think the answer is he doesn't really see it as related to economics as such, I think his inclination might be to see it as more of a societal issue ripe to be solved through a bit of the old central planning rather than the markets. So I think we all need to keep an eye on what he says about housing policy from now on, there is intent there now, although they may yet be frustrated by events obviously. Mention of pre-war Labour leads me to note some alarming parallels esp. this idea of offering liberals and tory turncoats positions in government and the possible requirement to cut spending as the American economy ails before our eyes. One party government...does that remind you of anything? Try "National Government". This has all happened before with a dour and somewhat unpopular Labour leader from north of the border at the helm and it didn't go well then either. Gordon Brown = Ramsay MacDonald: Redux? All wild speculation of course

Pretty much, that is why it is Alastair Darling and not Ed Balls in the job who is being kept relatively safe over at Education [sorry, Children, Schools and Families]. from where he will be called to 'fix' the situation when it has turned. It will be Balls up, so to speak, after the next election if they get back in. The present situation has been widely predicted in the papers for some time.

A version of "Zeno's Paradox" where people always have spare money and you just halve the amount they have left every time IRs go up and they never have to move?. The belt can always be tightened further, this is the principle that Mao believed in. In reality sooner or later a small but signficant number of people will reach an absolute threshold and then they'll either have to sell or sooner than that others more sensitive to their standard of living will begin to think life isn't worth living with their debt burden and choose to sell (a perfectly sensible decision, I'm sure many of us have done that with the over-specified car/camera/whatever that turned out to be more than we really needed relative to its value). Rather than being "destitute" they are really just STRing albeit without much equity probably, if that makes it sound less dramatic.

A leasehold flat worth buying... 7241 years left wouldn't be bad. As to the business idea, I'm going to investigate flat-screen TV arbitrage. I don't think there is a single plasma set in the country that is actually paid for as yet. The manuals for those things should come with a debt counselling advert on the back.

I think there is an oversupply being trained but the retention rate is still ludicrous. If you want to keep a leaky bucket filled you need to leave the tap on. Some of those vacancies will be jobs that anyone with any experience would rather go on the dole than fill, there has to be some cannon fodder in the system. I'd suggest the increase in numbers is simply coming from the increase in graduates given a degree often just sends you back to shelf stacking, I guess a lot of people are trying their hand at the PGCE for lack of anything else to do.

They did a prescient thing about "luxury executive appartments" in the old one, with a bit of stealing from J.G. Ballard, it was called "Paradise Towers". It begins with the assistant ooing and arring over a new build brochure... Mel wants to go swimming so the Doctor takes her to a tower block called Paradise Towers where there is reputed to be a fantastic pool. When they arrive they discover that the place is far from being the superb leisure resort they had expected - it is run-down and dilapidated. The hallways are roamed by gangs of young girls known as Kangs; the apartments are inhabited by cannibalistic old ladies, the Rezzies; and the building is managed by a group of dictatorial caretakers, presided over by the Chief Caretaker. The latter is in thrall to the disembodied Great Architect Kroagnon, the building's creator, who is using giant cleaning machines systematically to kill all the occupants as he considers that they are spoiling his creation by living there. Kroagnon reminds me of certain sort of BTL landlord actually. Coming to a new development near you sometime soon.

I read it as a dig at Cameron. Nobody has any idea what he believes, not even his own party. He came from nowhere to lead without any ideas, I think there is a pretty strong parallel there. I thought they already did New Labour with Harriet Jones in The Christmas Invasion. "Don't you think she looks tired?" was a Blair thing that was apposite when it was written if you remember the other year after he was ill but New Lab fought back with lots of press about him striding around purposefully and shots of him pretending to play tennis and so on with schoolkids. [Edit, if you make an allowance for when it was written and then filmed, that would put us directly in the Cameron "honeymoon" period by my reckoning]

Excuse me if this is a little indelicate, I don't really want to know the answer to these questions, I'm suggesting more you ask yourself: This 50k wouldn't be a pair of golden handcuffs to the local area would it? Do you think you will be "allowed" to move at your discretion after the purchase has been made? Are they expecting you might get comfortable, get procreating and never get round to leaving? Before the market did silly things, conventional wisdom used to be if you aren't sure of staying for 3 years, don't bother, some would even have said 5 years unless you have iron discipline when it comes to buying odds and ends, a new carpet here, a few sticks of extra furniture there etc. This mentality has obviously changed a bit with the advent of the "flipper" who owns for a handful of months and people making aggressive short-term gains during the bull market in property but there might still be some wisdom in it. I'd say housing market and money aside what is really at stake here is how much you want to be able to move in 18 months time. What is your independence and freedom worth to you? My own sense of this is that main issues here aren't really to do with the housing market. Good luck either way.

It could be more of a shock for some people than we anticipate. I realise this strains credibility a bit but I really did overhear someone talking loudly in the pub a few weeks ago. "So what if the mortgage goes up a few percent when we get another one, its only a grand a month, I can afford the price of a few pints extra on top of that". Oh dear...slight misunderstanding there I think.

Railway subsidies? They're up to record levels, three times what they were when we had British Rail. They haven't been "removed" at all. Although given your agenda it probably suits you to pretend they have, right. Unfortunately after believing the sorts of arguments you put forth, when the private operators got their hands on the books they found out that BR, poor inefficient state-managed tax payer abusing BR, had made all the efficiency cuts it would be possible to make years previously.

Another thread showing how New Labour are fooling people so easily. I guess the problem is that there is some confusion about who is being fooled over what, it seems people are lapping it up regardless. I know an "inclusion officer". His real job? See if you can guess which one it is: a. Painting murals in praise of ethnically diverse societies and playing songs on an acoustic guitar b. Wringing his hands, reading the Guardian and writing letters to the Socialist Review from the Nelson Mandela cafeteria c. Kicking gypsies out (sorry "Proactive management of unauthorised encampments complying with legislation which ensures the rights of travellers and balancing their needs with those of the local community") These job titles are just what councils do when they can't pay the going rate, they try to sell the post as serving the "social good" with terms like "inclusion" which if you scratch the surface just means taking responsibility for the things councils have always done for donkey's years. Its classic New Lab and their neo-Orwellian approach to things, continue with Thatcher's policies and claim you are 'helping people'. We'll have a "Ministry of Love" devoted to torturing people before the decade is out. I guess it cons some people into applying for the jobs that pay well below the going rate if they were given their true and sober titles and its clearly conned a lot of people here. I would certainly agree with the argument they only have themselves to blame if they get criticised and that more transparency is required. I suppose we can go forward just sniggering at the silly PC job titles over and over again but I think are more serious issues underneath that to be honest. Anyhow, I'll let you get back to believing the Daily Mail is a newspaper.

I think that was a little harsh, I am a veritable font of wisdom on an at least semi-regular basis. :angry:

It isn't up to landlords, it is up to the market. I had written a longer reply but actually I've realised it would be a bit redundant. What landlords "want" or even "need" is neither here nor there, they are just people selling a service like anyone else.

What great humanitarians the banks have become!

They have a three-part series running on being priced out of housing. I heard the first one on Monday (priced out couple in Totnes). I presume this is the third installment?

Altogether now: I AM SELLLLLLING, I AM SELLLLLLLING, YOUR HOME BELONGS TO ME, I AM SELLING, STORY WATERS, TO CLEAR MEW, TO BE FREE....

Maybe, in turn, Tesco will start listening to what their turkeys have to say in early December.

According to National Stats online (October 06): . = 27,456 which seems about right to me. So the limit is £110,000.

52 (35 houses) showing up on Rightmove ("to rent") fitting that specification. I don't know if the area they are in is basically Beirut but there are some 3 bed terraces in there at 475, some "immaculate" new builds etc. Agree, landlord sounds like a ******* of the first water. A visit from the void fairy will put him straight.

Replying to myself here... Brown set to reshuffle science Chillingly: "I think it's almost unimaginable that everything will be exactly the same, two weeks from tomorrow, when he's had the chance to get his feet under the table." ...I hate being right sometimes. :angry:

1997 was the lowest turn-out since the universal suffrage came into force. Hardly "the whole country". Of course it was beaten by 2001 and 2005 which were even lower. 70% of boomers vote, younger people somewhere between 30-40%. Considering the demographics it is clear why we have almost exclusively politics designed for the interests and needs of boomers in this country.

Emmigration from the UK is at record levels. I've noticed it certainly amongst people I know...seems a steady drip each year. The reason the majority can't leave is that they wouldn't get into Australia or Canada without qualifications etc and are scared by places that don't speak English. So its just doctors, scientists, engineers, nurses, useless good-for-nothing people like that which society doesn't need who are leaving. Don't worry though, the much sought after benefit claiming chav, the real engine of British prosperity, isn't going anywhere. I do agree with the point that boomer parents were too selfish and lazy to bring up their kids properly in many cases. I think the damage they've done to this country with their negligence is something that they should feel very, very ashamed about. I think that little bit of sarcasm backfires frankly because there is a case to answer.

I wish I knew However, I did hear something funny on the Financial Sense Moneyhour once, maybe last year. Jim Puplava (or maybe his guest, sometimes Jim talks more than the guests do) mentioned that the last time the banks in the US went to the wall (Savings & Loan) he tracked down the debt bundle that contained his mortgage. He then wrote to the other people in the bundle and they bought it for "pennies on the dollar". Unfortunately they didn't explain what happened next (did he have to keep paying the middle man or did he just write-off in effect his own debt with himself?). So the debt at least exists in identifiable form within the bundles anyway according to that anecdote.