Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Tommy

  1. Wrong. 7% is way above the inflation figures like CPI which are innacurate anyway. A fair measure of inflation would probably be 10-12%. A fair measure of inflation would include basic expenses like food, accomodation and bills. Items that I think aren't in the CPI basket. An increase of 7% a year seems easily fair to me.

    Ok, if you do not like CPI forget CPI, but RPI also has always been lower than 5% recently. How do you come up with 10% - 12%? have you got a link or a reference? It seems really really high!

  2. I thought you meant what you wrote Tommy. If you don't mean it don't write it. That's silly don't you think? Writing things you do not mean and expecting everybody else to think that you meant the opposite to what you wrote. Very silly behaviour.

    I am laughing my head off. Are you going to take seriously a CV from somebody who has worked at Joe's car wash for 3.50 an hour. It's becoming more and more absurd every time you write something. have you been brainwashed or something?

    You have not said anything sensible.

    Stop adding adjectives to back-pedal and re-frame. You would take foreigners before British is what you said in plain English. You have now nearly got to the point where I said you should be at about 100 posts ago. It has taken you a long time. What should happen, is that you take a hard-working 'person' over a lazy 'person' no nationalities or colours or any other of your bigoted views should come into that decision. Do you get it Tommy? Not hard at all.

    It's easy, I explained it 100 posts ago.

    I am embarassed for you Tommy, I am embarassed for you.

    Rubbish, I have never said that...

    Do you have a crystal ball? Are you a fortune teller? No! Well, do not pretend you know what I meant then.

    I obviously know what I meant and what I think better than you do. You keep insulting me and pretending I have said some things I have never said.

    What do I have to do more than saying: I have never said I would take foreigners before British, you have misunderstood me. I have ONLY said I would prefer a hard working Polish over a lazy British. (this is the 100th time I am repeating this simple concept). Given a hard-working British and lazy Polish, I would of course go for the British one.

    The point I raised is that for Polish peole the minimum wage is a good wage (at least initially) and so there are many very hard working Polish people looking for minimum wage jobs, this is why people are happily employing them: because they are hard working (and not because they are Polish).

    This is all I have said!

    I have expressed my thoughts on a topic, you are free to express yours on the same topic. I do not know why instead you have started insulting me. If I say A and you think B, say "I think B", but do not call me bigot, ridicuolus and rude because I have said A, especially when you then pretend I have said C, a completely made up distorted version of A.

    I also want to say I am not back-pedalling, I am constantly repeating exactly the same things! If you think I am back pedalling maybe you are starting to see that you misunderstood me initially.

    Haven't you got anything better to do than accusing me for no reason whatsoever? You see, in this forum people should express their views of various topics, and this is what I have done. If you were saying: "I think you are wrong for this reason, so I think xxx is the right thought" you would be constructive... but accusing me destructively and distorting my views is a waste of time, it's off topic and does not interest anyone. Also you talking at a personal level, which is never nice, especially when you do not know me, you have misunderstood all I have said, and you're using very negative adjectives to describe me. Who's rude?

    What should happen, is that you take a hard-working 'person' over a lazy 'person' ...

    Are you kidding me?! This is what I have said since the beginning and this is what I have been repeating all the way through. You are right! But so am I! We are saying the same thing here...

    ... no nationalities or colours or any other of your bigoted views should come into that decision.

    Ok, when have I ever talked about colours? I hope you will not start pretending I have talked about colours as well.

    I hope you get paid to spend time insulting me unjustly, otherwise you must have a very sad and boring life to spend your time doing this pointless thing.

  3. no you didn't you have added the lazy adjective afterwards, to try and cover the fact that you are a bigot.

    Polish people coming here working for minimum wage don't have CV's and references worth anything. Don't make me laugh.

    I'm not arguing about nothing. You haven't said anything sensible. I would employ a person on their merits. You wouldn't. You use nationality and whether someone is a chav or not to help you decide.

    Stop pretending you know what I meant, but more importantly stop using negative adjectives to describe me, you are being rude. This attacks you are doing are off topic, boring and useless. I am not covering anything, I am just telling you what I meant. Do you think you know what I meant more than I do?! Well, this is silly, don't you think?

    As for the CV, foreign people, after a couple of jobs in the UK will have both CVs and references. You can laugh if you want.

    I have said very sensible things, you are not listening. You have closed your ears and your eyes, you think something about me and you are not changing your mind. This is your problem and not mine.

    Of course I would employ people based on merits, of course I do not use nationality to decide. All I have said is that given two people, a lazy Briton and a hard working Polish I would go for the Polish. Of course, given other two people, a lazy Polish and a hard working Briton I would go for the Briton. Is this so hard to comprehend? No, but you do not seem to get it.

    I do not even know why I am defending myself, you are just embarassing yourself.

  4. Here is your quote in black and white:

    "Still, if I had my own company and I had the option to employ some hard working Polish people or, for the same money, some chavs I would not think twice and I would go for the foreigners."

    how the hell would you know someone of any nationality was hard working before you employ them (because they are polish i suppose?) and don't add lazy and benefits in there to back-pedal and re-frame.

    i think you are ridiculous and boring, i agree we should stop it.

    Yeah, thanks for the quote... exactly. We were talking about lazy chavs living off benefits and I have said I would prefer a hard working Polish person compared to a lazy chav.

    How do you know? Easy, CV and references... changed job every 2 weeks and unemployed most of the time? Are the few references saying you are lazy? I would not employ you. It's of course not based on nationality and not all Polish people are hard-working anyway.

    Haven't you got anything better to do than arguing with me about nothing?! I have said very sensible things, would you employ a lazy person?

    Ok, forget it...

  5. How will they ever get off of benefits if companies ship in unskilled labourers from abroad instead of hiring them?

    Perhaps I'm old-fashioned, but surely British companies in Britain adopting a 'No Britons' hiring policy is absurd?

    Have I ever said that?

    I have said I would not want to employ lazy chavs living off benefits (following a discussion to reduce benefits). I have never talked about employing only foreign people. Any hard-working Briton would of course be extremely welcome.

  6. i have read your posts and i think they are very rude. maybe you could read them again and look how you have said that you would employ people from foreign countries before british people. things like that are thankfully illegal, i hope you are not responsible for employing people with those views.

    I have said I would prefer to employ a hard working polish instead of a lazy chav living off benefits. Unless all British people are chavs living off benefits, and of course they are not, I have not been rude and I have not said I prefer to employ people from foreign countries before british people.

    This conversation is getting ridiculous, you are accusing me of ridiculous things and you are boring me and the rest of the people, so we should stop it.

  7. your tone is very, very rude towards millions of very hardworking british people. suggesting immigrants will work harder than british people is an insult. being Polish does not make you hard-working. being british does not make you lazy. do you have some loathing or dislike of british people? is that your agenda?

    unskilled british people would go work abroad in droves for £21 an hour. living ten to a house could give £400-£500 per week saved. four/five years of work and they could return and buy a modest house outright. Millions would leave tomorrow.

    No, I am not rude (if anything you are rude by calling me rude).

    I am not saying immigrants work harder than british people, I am saying that immigrants work harder than a small portion of english people who prefer to get benefits rather than having to work. This is very very different. I think it goes without saying that the majority of british people are very very hard-working. Read my posts better before making claims on me and my tones.

  8. It's all about incentive. If the figures I've read are correct, in Polish terms the British minimum wage is equivalent to something like £21 an hour, or nearly £44 grand a year assuming a 40-hour working week. Now, if you were to offer some "chavs" the rate of £21 per hour I'm sure they'd very quickly become "bovvered". :P

    well, i get your point, but it's not very accurate...

    English minimum wage in Poland would be a very good salary, true, but once they come here, minimum wage is not so good anymore because the cost of living here is much much higher. Anyway, ignore this for a moment... Let's talk about "chavs" on £21 pounds per hour...

    Do you think that chavs would migrate to another country, learn a new language, try hard to find a job and finally work very hard if they could potentially find in that country a job that pays £21 pounds an hour (which let's say it's the minimum wage in that country)? My answer is no!

    Chavs would probably take a job here for £21 an hour and work relatively hard, but many would not go through all the hassle that the some Polish people are currently going through. The Polish people we get over here tend to be very determinate and hard-working, I feel we get a good selection of them. The chavs are instead a selection of lazy English people. So you cannot compare apples with oranges.

    Illegal immigration is again completely different, it's a selection of bad people, but I think with legal immigration we get very hard-working people.

    Now, go back to the example where a chav could earn £21 pounds in a foreign country... add to the equation the fact that the cost of living is much much higher there and once they get over there £21 pounds an hour is basically just a bit more than the minimum wage over here. Now the chances of them moving to this other contry is next to 0%.

  9. How many times do you have to be provided with the stats and ignore it?

    How many times do members of the BOE have to sing the praises of migrant labour bringing down wage infation for you to to wake up to the reality of the situation?

    I still have to find stats which are really indicating that. Many stats are inconclusive.

    Remember that if you have wage inflation, in most cases it's then followed by price inflation and you're back to square one... This is on most books on economics.

    So, if you're talking about this kind of wage inflation, I am also praising immigration for keeping it under control.

    If instead, like me, by beneficial wage inflation you mean that the economic conditions are better and they allow for wages to increase faster without making price inflation also increae faster (cost of living) then I am not convinced immigration is preventing this from happening. Immigration is making the underlying economic conditions better, without immigration you could not, at this point in time, have beneficial wage inflation.

    As for the useless wage inflation immediately followed by price inflation, yeah, maybe immigration is preventing this because it's strengthening the economy and it's preventing a silly increase in wages for jobs that nobody wants to do (and a silly increase for those jobs would cause more harm than anything else).

    Now, I also believe that things that are not under control can turn bad... So I am totally against illegal immigration and also I am for more controlled legal immigration. I think the UK has issues now and they should be solved. I do not think we can continue this way, something should be done. But in principle I am not against immigration and I think it's causing more good than bad (again, legal immigration...).

  10. The point you are missing is that immigrants supress wages across the board pushing more people towards the minimum wage. Large numbers of illegal immigrants and legal immigrants work for below minimum wage because they don't know about the minimum wage and if they make a fuss they get sacked.

    In a recent case near me the entire cleaning staff of a hotel were sacked and replaced with foreign agency staff paid below min wage. Do those replaced not count bcause their replacements were accepting illegal payments?

    Immigrants don't pay more tax than the services they use. If that was true taxes would be falling. Instead we have local governments demanding more money for overburdened services.

    Do not put illegal immigration into the equation. I am totally against illegal immigration, this is bringing both crime and less importantly might aslo be suppressing wage inflation. Illegal immigration should be stopped. Fulll stop.

    As for legal immigration I am not too convinced it's bad and I am not too convinced is necessarily suppressing wage inflation.

    I am surprised a hotel did that. Why didn't you report the hotel to the authorities? I still think they do not count. It's an illegal pay. If I have 10 slaves and I pay them 0 pounds, would you count that? Or would you simply say I am a criminal... In my opinion there is a minimum wage and it should be respected. Employers who pay less than that have an invalid contract and as such it should not be counted and instead the employer should be immediately forced to pay more (then you can immediately count it again).

  11. take this example;

    10 english workers pay 50/week tax.

    1 chelsea chairman pays 500 tax, 9 immigrants pay 1 tax.

    the average would be higher for immigrants.

    that's why i dont care much for averages. they don't mean much without any data.

    Ok, first of all it still makes sense because here we are talking about immigration in general and not only about the immigration of people earning minimum wage. Many immigrants I know are doctors, pharmacists, software engineers and they earn much mor than minimum wage. Of course then many are on minimum wage, this is of course true, but you have to look at immigration as a whole and so the average meakes sense.

    For the example above, it would help to have mean, median mode averages instead of just the mean average (let's say median and mode of salaries rounded to the nearest 1k).

  12. What I dont care about is you thinking that because there is a legal minimum that everybody is paid above it. They aren't.

    I don't care about average wages and taxes paid.

    Here you are missing the point...

    I have never said that there aren't people paid less than minimum wage, of course there are (not many though). What I have said is that it's illegal and we should not count them.

    If we start counting illegal things too we should then start looking at "wages" of drug dealers, kidnappers etc.. Ok, I am kidding, but you see the point. The companies paying less than minimum wage are giving wages against the law.

    The fact that you do not care about average wages is bad, if you keep looking at individual cases only you'll never get a full picture. The average case helps (but in itself is not sufficient of course). Also the fact that immigrants are paying more tax that natives means that they are not a cost to society.

    I still think that, instead of blaming immigrants for our low wages, we should stop moaning and start looking for better jobs.

  13. I would use RPI and not the misleading RPIX and CPI. you are losing out if your living costs are rising more than 3.5%. I know of many people whose living costs are rising more than 3.5%. They are losing out.

    On the contrary, I think RPI is misleading, but here we go... Why would you want to put interest rates on mortgages into the equation when:

    - if you rent you do not pay them

    - if you paid off your mortgage you do not pay them

    - if you are "poverty" and live in a council house you do not pay them (this is what we were talking about right?!)

    - inflation is the general trend of prices increasing over time. If anything you should put house prices in the equation, but not the payments of the interests of the mortgages.

    But I do not expect you to agree with me and I see your point, especially for people who stretched themselves and most of their salary goes into a mortgage, they have experienced a sharp increase in the cost of living, true. This is not really inflation though, in my opinion, if tomorrow, the BOE reduced IRs to 3% they would be in a very good position... IRs can go up and down... Inflation usually only goes up...

    I dont care if it is illegal to pay less than minimum wage. people are working for less than minimum wage now and have been for the past few years. like i said google it, I have met people currently working for less than minimum wage.

    I think you should care. I know there are jobs like that, but the employers should be sued.

    I am sure immigration is suppressing wage inflation, I see it in action. I don't think it is particularly complicated, immigrants are employed infront of natives in unskilled work. because they are paid less, it is more profitable for the company employing them.

    No, the average salary of immigrants is higher than the average salary of natives. You have the common misconception that immigrants are all unskilled and all going for lower paid jobs:

    "Immigrants on average earn more money - and pay more taxes - than British-born workers. Migrant wage levels were on average £424 a week compared with £395 for UK-born workers, a difference of £29."

  14. If they are not supressing wages, then what on earth do you think their purpose is ?

    Their purpose is to provide skills and labour that the UK needs. For examples foreign doctors are important, not to drive down wages (which are high anyway), but to simply have enough doctors!

    How much tax does a man with three children pay on minimum wage pay ? How much is he entitled to on the state to make up the difference ?

    How much do they spend if they are on minimum wage and benefits ? Where do they spend this ?

    Beneficial in what way, our prisons are full of immigrants and we know how diffficult and how many crimes it takes for someone to secure the luxury of a spell in a UK jail. Mate, getting a place at Harvard is easier these days!!!.

    Ok, so all immigrants are on minimum wages, with 3 kids and wife not working, right?

    How much tax is paid by a British family, both unemployed and claiming benefits, with 3 children? Frankly I do not see the difference. The only difference I see that most immigrants come here to work hard.

    As far as prisons are concerned... I frankly believe even British criminals are a cost, not just immigrants... Think about it: you commit a murder, to thank you we give you free accomodation, free food, free tv license etc... I think people in jail should work hard (if healthy) and contribute to society, but this is off topic. What I want to say is that it's not a problem with immigration per se, but with the prisons and the justice system.

    Plus, I hope you'll agree with me... most immigrants come here to work and do not commit crimes (legal immigrants of course, I am against illegal immigration!).

  15. A colleague who worked at the college, later told me that their 'quota" for disabled personnel was down.

    Ok, this has nothing to do with disabilities or immigration. It's a government incentive... Some companies get incentives for recruiting people with disabilities and/or from ethnic minorities. We could start discussing if this idea is right or wrong, but it would be off topic.

    In a normal scenario the best candidate gets the job, if this does not happen for the reason you mentioned, then you might want to discuss if such incentives are right or wrong, but it does not make immigration itself wrong. Right?

  16. na, 3.5 is well below RPI nowadays.

    I can also tell you of cases where people are working for less that minimum wage. just do a google search, you will find many examples.

    if you are telling me immigration is not suppressing wage inflation, i don't agree at all.

    No, RPI-X and CPI are below 3.5%:

    "RPIX inflation – the all items RPI excluding mortgage interest payments – was 2.8 per cent in September, up from 2.7 per cent in August."

    RPI might have recently been higher than 3.5, but I would not necessarily use this figure... I think if you get 3.5% per year with current inflation levels you not losing out.

    As for jobs paying less than minimum wage (unless it's for people aged 18 to 21) it's illegal and they should be reported.

    I am not too sure immigration is suppressing wage inflation, I think it's more complicated than that. In theory yes, it is, in practice without immigration the economy might have been weaker and salaries more stagnant. You do not know.

    Also immigrants do not only "steal" wages, but they also spend, create jobs, etc... Immigration should be controlled, whcih is not now, but I believe that if controlled it can be very beneficial to our country.

  17. While your opinion has much merit, it has one major drawback - it is based on the current chav/NEET economic and social situation. Change this and the "not bothered" situation changes

    If people were forced to do unskilled work, they would have less time to hang around McDonalds in burberry all day and work on modifying their vauxhall novas

    I work in the health service, and was transferring a sick lady to intensive care last year. As we were waiting for the bed to become available, I was chatting to her husband. He was in his late sixties and had recently retired. He had worked in the mines for many years, and then as a night watchman in a warehouse. The conversation then drifted to his children and what they did.

    Talk about opening a floodgate! He tore into them, calling them useless layabouts, who lived on benefits and wouldn`t do an honest days work. He feared his grandchildren were heading them same direction. I asked why this was so, (not wanting to suggest he was a crap parent) - he said when he was growing up, the only way to get ahead was to get a job. Unlike, nowadays, where you can get what you want for doing nowt

    The solution is to give those who choose not to work, no choice in the matter

    I totally agree with you, but you will agree with me this will take time, one thing is sending them to work by reducing benefits, another is to change their attitude, this will take many years. Anyway, we should start the campaign as soon as possible, the longer we delay it the worst it's going to be...

  18. There are loads of Indian IT workers earning 60, 70, 80K+ in London and the surrounds.

    What's wrong with that? There are a lot of British People on those salaries too? Are you suggesting that only the British should be allowed earnings of 60k or above?

    There are jobs in the IT sector that pay the salaries you've mentioned, ok, anyone can send a CV and apply to these jobs. The best candidate will be selected. The best candidate could well be Indian.

    Maybe instead of complaining we should invest more in our careers, keep learning, keep growing, then we would be the best candidates.

    Sorry, but if I apply for a 80k job and I do not get it, I do not care if an Indian got it instead, if he was British it would be the same to me. I would still have lost an opportunity. The lesson would be for me to do better in the next interview, to start taking responsibilities in my current job that can serve as experience for the new jobs I am applying to etc...

  19. what about people on 5.52 in 2003, how much has theirs gone up?

    Could be anything, from 0% (cannot go down from there since it's now minimum wage) to a billion percent...

    On average it will be somewhere around 3.5% per year, so it's likely to be now around £6.35, which is definately in line with inflation. ( http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=285 )

    I am sure you can tell me many cases of people who got 0% one year and then 2% another year, back to 0% and then maybe 2% and are now on £5.75, but then I could maybe tell you about someone who was earning 5.52 and it's now earning 8 per hour (without promotion).

  20. on top of the tax, it has also kept the wage bill down for big business while keeping wage increases down for the poorest people in the country.

    Not true, the minimum wage in October 2003 was £4.20 in October 2007 became £5.52.

    This is a compound annual growth rate of just over 7%.

    7% each year is way above inflation.

    If anything, minimum wages have been growing too fast! We would all like the minum wage to be much higher and everyone to be out of poverty, but truth is business would go out of business if this happened... I think 7% is as fast as it gets!

  21. With so many million actually not working, maybe we should have concentrated on getting people working by making it less lucrative to be on benefits. Maybe, a "Get a chav to work" campaign

    True, except that many of the "chavs" currently on benefits, if forced to work, would not be very productive as they are "not bothered".

    I agree with you, if you are able to work, young and healthy, benefits should be reduced as chances are you do not want to work (but if you have disabilities or any other real problem then benefits should be increased). Still, if I had my own company and I had the option to employ some hard working Polish people or, for the same money, some chavs I would not think twice and I would go for the foreigners.

    The vast majority of natives are very skilled, hard-working and dedicated, but you have to admit that for minimum wage jobs the situation is different.

  22. People spending 30-40% of take home joint pay on a mortgage (often IO!) is not sustainable or advisable. At some point, probably quite soon, people will realise that revolving their entire live around home ownership is simply not worth it. Oh, it may be affordable, in the sense of being financially viable in some way - but worth it? No way.

    40% of take home pay in an IO mortgage is surely a lot of money!!!

    Imagine two people earning 40k, this is £4,878 net every month.

    40% of £4,878 is = £1,951

    Now at 6% IO, this would be a loan of about £390,200. So, if you've put let's say only 10% deposit you would have paid the propery £433,555.

    So they would have bought a house that costs 433k and that's about their joint income times 5.42 and they have a loan that's about joint salary times 4.88.

    I seriously hope sane people will never take a loan that is more than joint salary times 4 (and 4 is already a lot).

  23. Women in the workplace, here we go...

    - Women have worked for some time

    - Women often have things called "babies"

    - Women tend not to earn as much as men

    This just shows up a big thinking error from bullish commentators.

    - Women have worked for some time:

    True, but most women were not, and now most women are.

    - Women often have things called "babies"

    True, but having many of these things was much more common in the past. Today the number of babies per couple has decreased.

    Also, most women I know work all the way during the pregnancy and then take the last 4 weeks off maybe, then they deliver the baby, take another 8 weeks and then go back to work. Childminders and nurseries do the rest. I do not advise this, I would probably stay home for at least the first 6 months if possible, but this is what most women I know are doing. So a woman works a lifetime like a man does, but she might, during her lifetime, take a couple of 12 weeks periods off... Does this really make a huge difference?

    My girlfriend will probably take a whole year away, between before delivery and after delivery, but she's been saving for this for a couple of years already, little every month. What is more her company would pay full salary for a few months (and then the government would pay some charity as well afterwards).

    - Women tend not to earn as much as men

    Maybe so, not true in all cases, but true on average. So? The family income might not be what it used to be times 2, but times 1.7 or 1.8 I do not know. Still there is more money in the household.

    Also the disparity in pay between women and men is hopefully narrowing.

    People spending 30-40% of take home joint pay on a mortgage (often IO!) is not sustainable or advisable. At some point, probably quite soon, people will realise that revolving their entire live around home ownership is simply not worth it. Oh, it may be affordable, in the sense of being financially viable in some way - but worth it? No way.

    Bears may be naive and/or excessively hopeful, but the alternative - that people will give up 25 years of their life to own a starter home - is nonsense. People have higher standards. Once they look elsewhere for fulfilment (already happening among my friends and family), then market is done for. BTLers can't buy everything.

    Remember also that it is better to have 80k household income split between two people earning 40k each. This is £2,439 net per month each, so

    £4,878 net every month in the household.

    80k household income were only one person is earning 80k and the other one is not earning is £4,406, so there is £472 less every month.

    What is more if one gets ill there is at least one salary, if only one person is working, you have to hope that only the non-working person gets ill!

  24. £1,095


    The article claims that the house was bought for £1,095 in 1929.

    It then claims that in today's money this would be around £44,355.

    This means that the author of the article is considering a compound annual inflation of about 4.8%.

    The article then says that the house was sold in 2007 for £435,000.

    This means that the house has had a compound annual growth rate of about 7.97%.

    The two percentages (4.8% and 7.97%) are not too far apart, what makes the figures so far apart (44k and 435k) is simply the fact that small compound percentages over 78 years make a huge difference.

    I think it is pretty normal for HPI to grow faster than inflation over the long term. Why? To name a few...

    - women did not use to work, now they do and they contribute to paying the mortgage

    - the number of kids per family higher so a relatively small house is now considered a relatively big house

    - the population of england is increasing, but england itself is staying the same

    - jobs are more secure nowadays

    - it is easier to get credit

    - other essential things to live have decreaed in price in real terms, so there is more percentage of salary that can be spent on house

    - the number of people living in each house has decreased, this means that for the same number of people more houses are needed (and on top of that there are also more people!)

    - etc...

    I would imagine that in the future, over the long term, HPI will still grow faster than inflation on average but not by such a big margin.

    To conclude, I see nothing exceptional in the article.

  25. Maybe if we told them... They only seem to have a usability feedback form under http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/ .

    I have not been able to find an email address to which to write to.

    Yeah, I would also be interested in seeing the correct figures.

    BTW, sorry if this has been discussed already, I must have missed the topic :-(

    I have sent an email to them, but only to a general nationwide email address, I hope it gets forwarded to the HPI department!

  • 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.