Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Doc_H

New Members
  • Content Count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Doc_H

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie
  1. Some enterprising chappy has created a Facebook group "Divest Suffolk County Council of Andrea Hill." http://www.facebook.com/#!/home.php?sk=group_128883290512394 I hope they keep her fully informed about posts to it...
  2. Thank you for helping me get up. The nasty man who was here before you pushed me over.
  3. sillybear2, on 14 April 2010 - 09:37 AM, said: He's still deluded :- Gordon Brown ....................................... "I've been saying for years that regulation has got to be stronger," he told the BBC a few minutes ago. ====== This contrasts rather with the exchange between Adam Shaw and Simon Johnson on Today, this morning, at 7.17am: Adam Shaw: "Well, the PM as you say admitted in an interview on ITV to be broadcast tonight that he mistakenly gave way to pressure from the banks to weaken the regulation of the industry. Earlier I spoke to Simon Johnson; he's a former chief economist at the IMF. He's also just written a book called "13 Bankers" about the possible next financial meltdown. And I asked him how significant he thought the Prime Minister's admission was." Simon Johnson: "It plays well with the electorate here and presumably in the UK to sound a little bit sorry, but you have to ask the question what are these people actually doing about it, and if you look at the level of either the United States or the United Kingdom or what they're pushing for within the G20 it is very weak in terms of further regulation of the financial sector." Adam Shaw: "This is the point isn't it. I think a lot of people will look at the banking sector and wonder why it doesn't look very different from how it looked before this crisis." Simon Johnson: "That's absolutely correct. I attended a speech, a very good speech, by Adair Turn,er Lord Turner, head of the FSA, just last weekend actually, and he absolutely hammered this point home. The people who are very well informed and of a sceptical disposition who study finance carefully and who are of that sector in some sense are very negative about the changes. The reforms we've had so far are minimal and what's in the pipeline is also very very little." Adam Shaw: "But to be fair, there are calls within Government for bigger resources for the banks so that they can't get into these troubles again." Simon Johnson: "Well, there's a lot of talk and very little action so far and that's true generally by the way across the G20." Adam Shaw: "Well in the past Gordon Brown has maintained that he argued for greater financial regulation but he says his efforts were resisted by the City and indeed by the Conservatives. Simon Johnson told me that doesn't fit with his recollection." Simon Johnson:: "He was a head of one of the oversight bodies for the International Monetory Fund while I was working there and my distinct recollection is that he resisted all attempts by the IMF and other bodies to more closely press the British and other Governments on better management for their financial system."
  4. Several people in this thread have wondered why this came to court. Perhaps this reader's comment explains all: " I was chatting to an estate agent friend about this a few months ago. They told me their were a few lenders going through everybodys files looking for errors. Even if it is a wrong date, or a signature in the wrong box, the files are pulled. The practice then is to repossess, auction in London, and then for the buyer to re-auction immediately within the locale of the property. A local auctioneer has been quoted on another website stating 'their are hundreds of thousands of pounds to be made from this practice'. " b*st**ds regards, Doc
  5. I'm pretty sure it was Lliam Halligan, and yes, he was very bearish compared with the previous "let's borrow as much as it takes" speaker. Doc
  6. "...he rattled off something about houses going up an average of 10% p.a. in the last century. Is there anything to back this up or disprove it?" Well, 20 pounds at 10% turns into 275,612 over 100 years [ie 20 * (1.1^100)]. Did a house cost 20 pounds in 1908? Amazingly, probably not a great deal more than that - but I don't know. House prices in 1908, anyone?
  7. "Firstly it must be a member of BNTA - the British Numinastic National Association." Why do you say this? I bought from a long-standing coin and medal dealer, but it didn't occur to me to check any BNTA status. Have I done something unwise? (gulp) Some sovereign statistics: diameter: 22.05mm. weight: 7.9881g. Purity: 91.66% (22ct). Fine gold content: 0.2354 troy oz - this is the 'oz' referred to when dollars per oz or pounds per oz is given. So to calculate the value of the gold portion in a sovereign, multiply the current £ / troy oz rate by 0.2354 Currently gold is about £480 per oz, so the gold content of a single sovereign at the moment is worth about 480 * 0.2354 = £112.99 Doc
  8. Here. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finance...e-bail-out.html In an interview with the BBC World Service, Mr Brown said: "It is necessary to get these bad assets out of the system as quickly as possible. We support and welcome the American Resolution Trust Corp. Let us make sure we stabilise the financial system immediately." There's also a Times Online link to a similar story that doesn't actually work at the moment. Doc
  9. It was widely forecast that Gordon Brown's speech would include some kind of apology for mistakes made. The following has, I think, been described as just such an apology: "Where I've made mistakes, I'll put my hand up and try to put them right. So what happened with 10p stung me because it really hurt that suddenly people felt I wasn't on the side of people on middle and modest incomes - because on the side of hard-working families is the only place I've ever wanted to be." But it seems to me that this is no apology at all - he say's he was stung by some kind of misperception - the foolish masses misperceived what he'd done as meaning that he wasn't on the side of those with low incomes, because, he assures us, he really is. So he's not apologising for anything. One might respond to him by saying "Well, if you're on the side of people with modest incomes, why the hell did you abolish the 10p rate??!!" I don't think this snippet of his speech has been much commented on, but's been niggling at me ever since I heard it, and I feel compelled to say something, albeit belatedly. Far from being an apology, it seems like just more denial on his part: "How can they [how dare they?] think I'm not on the side of modest earners? Of course I am! I am on their side, even when I make them poorer! Why can't they see that?! Ungrateful wretches!" Ah, that's better... regards, Doc H
  10. It was widely forecast that Gordon Brown's speech would include some kind of apology for mistakes made. The following has, I think, been described as just such an apology: "Where I've made mistakes, I'll put my hand up and try to put them right. So what happened with 10p stung me because it really hurt that suddenly people felt I wasn't on the side of people on middle and modest incomes - because on the side of hard-working families is the only place I've ever wanted to be." But it seems to me that this is no apology at all - he say's he was stung by some kind of misperception - the foolish masses misperceived what he'd done as meaning that he wasn't on the side of those with low incomes, because, he assures us, he really is. So he's not apologising for anything. One might respond to him by saying "Well, if you're on the side of people with modest incomes, why the hell did you abolish the 10p rate??!!" I don't think this snippet of his speech has been much commented on, but's been niggling at me ever since I heard it, and I feel compelled to say something, albeit belatedly. Far from being an apology, it seems like just more denial on his part: "How can they [how dare they?] think I'm not on the side of modest earners? Of course I am! I am on their side, even when I make them poorer! Why can't they see that?! Ungrateful wretches!" Ah, that's better... regards, Doc H
  11. Hmm. Yes, I think the emphasis is on "wander". I suspect if you turned up with a chainsaw to the woodland you'd brought through AncientWoodland.com, then you'd get shown the door pretty quickly. [Or gate]. So you may own it, but there'll be restricted covenants or whatever they're called that would prevent you doing much with it. For example, they say about one of their woodlands: "All sporting rights have been secured to ensure that nobody can hunt or shoot on the wood, creating a safe haven for all of the creatures of the forest." so that's an immediate limitation on what you can do in 'your' woodland. Whereas with Woodland.co.uk you buy the right to take some of the wood etc - as mentioned in the list on my earlier post. I'm not knocking AncientWoodland, just pointing out that there are very different schemes whereby you can buy woodland, and with some you are essentially buying it to conserve it, and with others you are buying it to work the woodland in some way. regards, Doc H
  12. Hi, I have an idea that some places suposedly 'selling' woodland don't really pass on the title properly, so you kind of rent it, and feel good about conserving it, but and can't do much with it - perhaps you're thinking of that kind of scheme. BUT if you really do own some woodland, here are some things you can do with it: http://www.woodlands.co.uk/owning-a-wood/w...-activities.php I believe there are some arcane restirctions on how much wood you can chop down - you can't simply level an area of woodland and plant wheat, for example - you can only remove so many cubic metres of wood per year, or something - but it's not terribly limiting. regards, Doc
  13. Thanks for the suggestion re Defence Estates, Yoss. Interesting range of sizes of the parcels of land they’re selling, eg: 6.49 hectares, 43.69, 93.33, 7.099, 11.30, 0.709, 4.00, 0.79, 0.31 and so on - not just mega-estates. Doc H
  14. 2 years is a long time. What I'd really like to do is to utilise, soon, whatever may happen by way of fire-sales, forced selling of land banks etc, distressed selling by builders etc, rather than waiting for a general decline in prices to seep through the system. It ought to be possible, in principle - I just wondered if anyone had any tips as to how I might do this. Not trying to sound or be too mercenary about this... Doc H
×
×
  • 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.