Tiger Woods?

I don't quite see how there cannot be enough gold for a gold standard. Surely the standard would be set at "total units of paper money" divided by "amount of gold" at the outset, unless one means that central banks no longer hold the vast majority of gold or can't get their hands on it?

The problem with his argument is that he seems to leap from (1) and (2) to conclude that somehow the housing stock in the country will decline significantly driving rental yields up? Idiotic. The only way that this could happen is if a large number of houses sat empty for significant periods of time. Someone (and that could be a bank) will own any given house at any given point in time. Either they will live in it (therefore be out of the rental market), or they will rent it out (increasing the supply of rentals). Obviously this is a very simplistic counter argument to your friend's, as it doesn't take into account supply, behavioural changes (less/more divorce, immigration (outflow if we have a recession), changes in rate of building relative to these thing, social changes (density of people living in houses) etc.) I can't predict one way or the other how rents will go...but I do know that the argument put forward by your friend is so simplistic that it's conclusions are suspect.

And you are making the schoolboy error of assuming that a FTB earns the average salary...

Well spec'ed it may be, but the interior is hideous and will date very quickly.

I suspect we are doing this to help "our America friends" out. I also expect the pound will drop relative to the dollar, but buying something else might have been more prudent methinks.

Just reading all your posts RK - you have some serious issues. This person is asking for advice as they have been put in a difficult situation.

It is the OPs girl/boyfriends family. The OP isn't married. The buyers supposedly have 20-30k deposit, but on the other hand have debt. Why don't they clear the debt? Although the OP states that they aren't worried that they won't get the money back, I suspect they should be.

I obviously don't know the OPs OH and family, but I certainly know people who have been stung. Go into this with your eyes wide open. One thing that puzzles me is that they have debts but also have a 20k deposit? This doesn't ring true. Why not pay off the debt with their "deposit". The whole thing sounds a bit fishy to me.

Lizbet, From the photos you have provided there is absolutely no way you will lose in court. The house is immaculate and it appears you have improved it by adding the decking. You will be able to claim expenses back. You have lived in the house and a few scratches will be deemed to be fair wear and tear. All landlords need to use the Deposit Guarantee Scheme, but I believe this only applies to new contracts and it appears your contract was not renewed since the scheme came in. The reason the government introduced the scheme was to protect people from scum like your ex-landlord who know that some people will just roll over and let them steal their deposit. It is not the landlord's money, it is yours, and he is attempting to steal it from you. You wouldn't tolerate someone taking £650 quid from you in any other context would you? I know I wouldn't. Good luck with small claims court - though I don't think you will need any luck as you have made your own with those photographs.

No such clause in YOUR contract. It may very well be a clause in many contracts. Just because your bank was getting NRK sloppy, doesn't mean all of them did.

If this happens the pound will plummet relative to, say, gold. Moreover, it could not go on forever unless interest rates were suppressed forever (see previous point concerning inflation of currency), in which case wages would have to rise. Of course they won't rise quite as much as the cost of living, but I suspect you may be onto part of the "planned solution". Savers who keep there money in pounds will be shafted...debtors will get a get out of jail free card. There will be no moral hazard, as there will be no morals.

Concur. I'm absolutely sickened by what I am seeing since August. It is quite clear that any form of fiscal responsibility has gone right out the window. But then, should we be surprised, in this infantilised blame culture we now currently live in? Ffs, adults make decisions, they should have to live with their consequences. We live in an age where information is very easy to come by. There is no excuse. Once again those of us who are adults get to pay for the kiddies' mistakes. Has anyone read C.M Kornbluth's 1956b short story: "The Marching Morons"? I often feel that we already live in such a world.

Sounds sensible...it means that stay at home mothers' economic value is actually reflected in the tax system.

LOL. Been a lot of luck in timing and it could have all gone the other way. The real problem is how to protect the purchasing power of all the loot during the potential coming serious financial turmoil. My crystal ball, which was somewhat clear at the beginning of the year, is looking pretty cloudy at present. What surprises me, and throws spanners in the works, is all the cunning ways these bar stewards think of shoring up the dyke. For instance, this pooled CDO trash can proposed today was one thing I didn't see coming.

This was my immediate thought upon hearing the announcement. Depressingly corrupt...

A bit off topic, but: Yep, can agree. My experience is that the number of fillings is directly proportional to the number of trips to the dentist. My ex's father is a dentist and he reckons a lot of unnecessary filling are done. I had a dentist telling me as a teenager that he was going to do some prophylactic filling as I had "deep fissures"! As an adult I cannot believe that he admitted to this...I suppose he thought I was too young to understand that he was doing unnecessary work and my parents had dental insurance which would pay for it all. Nothing wrong with my teeth mind you, but there was the possibility that there might be something wrong in the future! Well, he botched a couple of those fillings, and then the guy who repaired it botched it, then the next woman who did a root canal and cap on what was left botched that, and now I have a third of a tooth. In fact every filling I have had since can be traced back to repairing those teenage "prophylactic fillings". Similarly, every dentist I've been to in the past 20 years, bar one, has wanted to remove my wisdom teeth. I have had the following conversation many times: Me: Are they coming through crooked? Them No Me: Are they pressing on other teeth? Them: No Me: Are they infected? Them: No Me: Do they have caries? Them: No Me: So why do you want to remove them? Them: Because they might get infected/require filling IN THE FUTURE. Me: But there is nothing wrong with them now? Them: No Me: Well, if anything does go wrong with them we'll have them seen to... And they are still there today. My advice: brush, floss, rinse, get your tartar scraped and don't let on you have dental insurance...they'll always find something to do....most of them just can't help themselves. My current dentist has a huge house, works part time and still has enough money to go helicopter skiing regularly.

Just been reading this thread and have a question to pose concerning the break clause - given that the S21 is invalid, what happens if the 6 month period passes? Does your contract then run unhindered until the 2 years are up (in which case you are in a very strong position) or does it mean that either party can give notice any time after 6 months?

All the time. Even people who have been through the last crash don't seem to believe that it could happen again. I am viewed as a bit of a "crank" (in the nicest possible way) in my small office - yet my bearish investments have turned nearly 100% profit this year, and I predicted a month before NR that there would be a run on a UK bank before the end of the year...they are beginning to see things the way I have been for the past few years. Still, it's always hard being Cassandra.

And we allow people like this to teach our children maths...!

What I don't understand is why anyone would expose themselves to a £900k mortgage (except someone rationally taking into account the action of the bubble, hence viewing the house as a leveraged position, but willing to bail on their home when the market looks like topping) . The guy could have had a decent house for £500k and been stuffing away the extra cash for the rainy day when his employers decided they didn't need his services any more - I mean it isn't as if city types losing their jobs is uncommon. Moreover, he should have realised that, as a credit derivatives trader, the value of his house and the likelihood of him being in employment are highly correlated. Very hard to have sympathy for people who paint themselves into these corners when it all goes wrong. People, even traders, always seem to want to live beyond their means. I just don't get it. I really don't.

A "keyworker" is a "prole" who provides direct services to "middle class" London bankers, lawyers, politicians etc.

Hmm, but how many companies save that £1500 and don't have the accident? Sometimes, the cost benefit analysis means its "worth the risk"...though not if you are the sucker the accident happens to.

It wouldn't stop, one just wouldn't get paid for it.

With respect to point 1...about 12 years ago the college I was at got rid of night porters and replaced them with Group 4. At that time, the college was paying Group 4 over 10 pounds an hour, but the guy sitting at the desk was getting £1.60 per hour, which rose to £2.60 or so once he had had 6 months "training". Given this, I wouldn't be surprised at the £15 to agnecy for a £6 worker.

You must work for the government...almost everyone I know works unpaid overtime as a matter of course.