Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

jaydee

Members
  • Content Count

    175
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jaydee

  • Rank
    HPC Poster
  1. Trouble is the glaring spotlight of truth is manipulated. The snippets we see/hear on this despicable man are probably sanitised sufficiently to enable us to think we are in an open transparent and enquiring society - give them a little bit to chew on so they think we are on their side type of thing. The 'system' - the judiciary - media - finance and of course rancid politicians - collectively have us under lockdown - though most of the population don't realise it - being in a cage created from their own indifference to personal debt and the relentless creep of state monitoring/control. I would like to think what goes around comes around - but the power remains with the corrupt few - as we've seen - a war or two - a few lives lost - usually among the poorest - is regarded as small change. He is I fear one of the many untouchables - but if one day he becomes touchable maybe he will fall hardest.
  2. Agree. IMO LVT can't come fast enough. It It will be very interesting to see who supports this bill - and of course who doesn't. Ms. Lucas has introduced a political 'litmus test' that may offer a useful insight into the intentions of the labour party should they be elected. Seems to me that there will be scaremongering by the right wing to the effect that LVT will affect the nations 'working' and middle classes - via a garden or allotment tax etc. A 'new statesman' article stated that 0.6% of the population own 69% of the land - time to re-distribute - not directly wealth as such but how it may be more fairly earned by all in society. The benefits of LVT to the economy and to the vast majority - should be very easy to communicate to even a largely disinterested electorate - lower land and housing costs - smaller mortgages - larger disposable income etc etc Sadly the 0.6% have the power and won't relinquish it easily - they will have no interest in such an egalitarian and commercially sensible shift. So if labour embrace it I shall be tempted to give them my vote - if they don't - and it's business as usual - I won't vote at all.
  3. Yes - it was total but predictable rubbish - no substantial issues explored in this pathetic 'reality show'. The program - as well as lacking depth and balance - was little more than a mouthpiece for the developers. Still this is what the mainstream media routinely provide - no real surprise that it was the usual VI supporting garbage.
  4. You haven't lost focus Eric - I - and I'm sure many others look to you - to remind us all from time to time how we've been collectively crushed by the scum that perpetrated this crime. From central bankers reducing interest rates to politicians lying while they splashed cash they didn't have - to the craven EA's and mortgage brokers and to the developers with planners in their pockets while sitting on land banks to keep the price up. Interesting stat in a New Statesman article - '0.6% (yes zero point six precent) of the population own 69% of the land - much of which qualifies for taxpayer funded agricultural subsidy even when it's unproductive - this speaks volumes about the class system at work ensuring wealth is transferred upward. It seems to me - the UK's media is complicit in maintaining this inequality. Sure - there was much fire and brimstone over phone hacking - including a Judge led inquiry - why? - can't have politicians wrongdoing revealed can we - just won't do - IMO the unfortunate family at the centre of it all was heaven sent as a reason to go the whole 9 yards. While it's clear that phone hacking is wrong - we have to also ask who has most to fear from it. I have given up expecting UK media to do any balanced reporting on serious issues - their biased middle east coverage is a prime example of that failure - and reveals a loyalty to the state apparatus not its people. Best IMO to garner information from other sources - RT (Russis Today) makes a pretty good fist of things. It could be argued of course that any media will give a slanted view - but - it's balance we need and some of the foreign news operators deliver it. So keep the reminders coming Eric - we need them - I agree it's still the elephant in the room that no one is talking about. While LIBOR was global - and as others have said affected everything - mortgage fraud was local and arguably more obviously painful for many.
  5. You miss the point entirely - which was simply that the lender has the burden of responsibility and duty of care in a loan transaction. The loose analogy I posted was just an example to illustrate where most (but not all) of the blame ought to be.
  6. Spot on! Hammond clearly wants to side step any duty of care as a guardian of the nation and support his corrupt allies in the city and elsewhere. There are also two 'consenting adults' in the drugs business - the pusher and the addict. The most culpable by far is the pusher.
  7. Well thanks for the 7 out of 10. You make some interesting points. I re-read my post and disagree somewhat with your assessment – feckless/irresponsible applies to some but not all - and your inference that I have characterised the boomers as not only frugal but also ‘salt of the earth’ is I think a bit of a stretch. But no matter I take your drift. I think by and large they were frugal – but having said that it was a frugality born of necessity. It would be tempting to argue as you suggest that under the same circumstances individuals would behave similarly and ordinarily I would agree. But I doubt it in this particular comparison - due to the time shift involved behaviours are inevitably different due to the different environments. There has been a shift in values, ethics and in attitude to debt. In the boomer years particularly the early ones - debt was frowned on – living off benefits - national assistance as it was known then - was regarded as an absolute resort only for the dirt poor - and divorce and certainly single parenting were rare. Unplanned pregnancies were regarded as shameful. The work ethic was generally strong – there was pride and a sense of obligation to an employer - but of course there was work – though often hard physical graft – the spivs had yet to be invented. Entitlement demands – based on envy didn’t play a part – only those linked to work. Also the church played a powerful stabilising role – as did the hangover from the make do and mend years of war time. So in essence society in the pre- and early boomer years was more cohesive – the blatant profiteering and abuse – last seen in the Victorian period was less pronounced until of course recent times. Nowadays – it’s a free for all – values have slid to a point where almost anything goes – there is no shame anymore – fraud by the already rich goes unpunished. Compound this with globalisation – and a lax/complicit government and the mix is complete. Wages and opportunities suppressed at home in order to advance corporate profit. Debt keeps the population in check – keeps them compliant – subservient – a useful government tool. Except this time it’s been overcooked. The arguments can continue like ping pong depending on where you see yourself – but blaming the elderly is a cop out – who will in many cases die cash poor but asset rich - and leave those assets to the younger generation. The reality of the situation is this. The elderly saved what little they could – and frequently due to their hardships earlier in life – spent as little as they could – this tended to keep prices down. The savings were loaned to borrowers - the borrowing ratio used to be less than 1 commonly no more than 0.8 – this ensured no more could be loaned than was saved – but the banks – unregulated by government took the ratio above 1 – commonly 1.3 or more – now the borrowing broke loose – and rose exponentially with no backing. Perhaps this is what Gordon Brown was thinking of when he famously applauded the city for its innovation. The commonly misled or just plain venal or mob driven - soaked it up and thus the mess we have now was created. So it could be argued that – in their naïve participation in the creation of monstrous debt - the younger generation and some of the boomers - have already destroyed the lives of many of the elderly – who now receive next to nothing in income return – and wait in poverty to die and hand their properties over to their ever grateful kids. Your point about sheeple is I fear true – a mob tends to coalesce in common supportive behaviour – somehow a self preservation tactic handed down from pre-history – except in this case it was lemmings over a cliff. The same applied to the banksters. The elderly paid their way and saved for tomorrow unlike their spendthrift debt addicted descendants. True - pensions have to be funded - and the transparency/efficiency of pension fund providers is another issue that needs looking at - but is that the fault of the elderly? I don’t think so. Fraudulent finance played a part as did complicit government and fly by night companies chasing a bottom line – these were run mainly by the younger generation – not the elderly – who by definition were no longer in the work place. And it was the younger generation that bought into it – again not the elderly – some of whom are now saddled with their frequently dysfunctional kids living at home – truly a cradle to the grave burden. The young have been betrayed that’s for sure – but by politicians - many of whom have property portfolios that must not be allowed to drop in value. The collapse of British industry started by Thatcher not only slashed jobs – but also slashed engineering apprenticeships that were such a valuable passport out of the ensuing mess. The buck stops with them – but be alert to their techniques of deflecting blame – they would be only too happy for the elderly to be scape goated. What to do about it? 1 – Don’t vote – turn the charade of democratic elections out on its ear. 2 Join a protest movement or a political party that doesn’t stink of hypocrisy and double standards. 3 If you must vote demand a voting slip with a tick box labelled ‘None of the above’. 4 Get out of the UK if you can. Some friends of mine are working in skilled jobs overseas in their 70’s. The young have been very badly let down – but not by the elderly – and the thrust of your post suggests you think the same. Best for us all to focus on the true culprits – not just the banks – they are naturally enough out to make a buck by whatever means – but it’s the politicians that looked the other way and allowed the mess to develop that led us to this. We need criminal prosecutions and incarcerations – but we know it won’t happen. But you watch – when money becomes available again – and rules are relaxed – the young will be off chasing 4 bedder shoe boxes from grubby developers like there‘s no tomorrow. Learning is slow I’m afraid and fear of getting left behind is a powerful driver.
  8. Well there seem to be a few posters - presumably young - that whine about the boomers so called advantages in old age. When I grew up money was valued - saving was encouraged. Families often lived 'in rooms' with parents. Bank managers were strict but fair - you were only loaned what you could repay - 3 times earnings and a 10% deposit were needed to buy property. Property owners rarely 'flipped' for profit but stayed in those often very modest homes for a life time. Car ownership was also rare - the local doctor or lawyer perhaps - the rest made do with public transport. Holidays abroad were unheard of except for the few well to do. During the 60's - 70's full employment provided security and a means to pay off mortgage loans. By the 80's many of the 'boomers' kids were becoming adult and eligible for loans that became progressively easy to come by - holidays abroad became a right - as did car ownership - often paid for with borrowed money. House prices continued to rise on the back of this 'borrowed' prosperity. House prices rocketed not during the boomer years - but when their off spring 'wanted it all today' - it made sense to get in debt - the inflation of the 70's encouraged it - the relatively young - all wanted their detached 4 bed NOW and the flash car to go on the drive. Wages were secure for a while and when they faltered or were unable to sustain the lifestyle of the YOUNG - debt substituted - credit card - second mortgages we all know what really went on - the YOUNG and often feckless and irresponsible - were taken to the cleaners by the banks/building societies etc. They fell headlong into the clutches of the vendors of consumer goods all fuelled by unbridled easy money and a cavalier attitude to risk. This demand drove up prices - those that sold early won - those that didn't get on the merry go round at all were left behind. The boomers were left on the sidelines marvelling at all the spendthrifts doing their stuff. It's of course true that the boomers - many of whom - sat tight - and frugally went about their business - saved for the future - left the home cinema in the superstore - did see a rise in the value of their properties - but this was not their doing. And now having saved for retirement are subsidising those that overstretched. This is grossly unfair - the market is not being allowed to work courtesy of the government and the BoE. If HPC was allowed - which I think the presumably young majority on this site would like to see - then the boomers would see a fall in property prices also. The survival of the fittest has been replaced by the survival of the weakest - in the long run this will not work - supporting the unsupportable will at some point fail - these distortions are wrong - unhealthy - and will ensure that many will stay in servitude to debt against their best interests. We are all being manipulated via the media and shady local and central government policies that favour the few. The jobs that the boomers enjoyed are long gone overseas - todays generation have to scramble for the few that remain - mostly low paid service sector work. There are many reasons for the miseries the young now face - but the boomers aren't one of them. Face it - you've been screwed over by the government - the financial sector - and the corporates. Don't allow them to divide and conquer the population - their classic tactic - to divert attention away from the true causes of the nations ills. I recommend any youngster to get out of this failed state called the UK - where the stitch ups will continue. I'll end with a stat from an article someone posted from the new statesman regarding land ownership in the UK '0.6% of the population own 69% of the land' - much of this land qualifies for subsidies - not on the basis of agricultural production - but on acreage - where do the subsidies come from? - starting to get the picture now?
  9. It seems there is nothing 'forcing' you to go - such as onerous debts or precarious employment - if so this can be a slight disadvantage because it will require perhaps a little more courage to 'pull the trigger' and go. If you don't go - you may regret it bitterly in years to come. Change can be a bit unnerving - but worth embracing - and as your only 26 there should be plenty of other overseas opportunities for you if this turns out not to suit. The zero tax regimes of most middle east countries may be worth exploring. Kurt Barlow was right regarding the 90 day rule regarding domicile status. Also - you can continue to pay NI insurance contributions while you are away - and IMO it's well worth doing so. The UK is in ruins - even worse than it was in the early 80's. Don't think twice - get out while you can - there is a whole new and exciting world out there - this ship is going down - don't get sucked under.
  10. Yes - good point. The evacuation of troops from Iraq - will free up more poor souls to keep the military money spinner going in a conflict in Iran. The pronouncements on the guilt in abstentia of Irans spiritual ruler by some NY court and the ranting of right wing hawks in Tel Aviv and the US says much about the way this is going - no doubt the 'special relationship' will be leaned on and our troops sent there also. Although the masses are in an awakening of a sort to the way they have been ecomomically exploited into destitution - there will be a conflict just in time to force attention away from who the real enemy is. The stench of dirty politics is not going away it seems.
  11. You're absolutely spot on IMO. Programs such as Newsnight and question time are pumping out superficial fluff to an audience mainly of duffers that have been fed a tabloid press information diet - the sharper ones of which are shut down whenever a pointed pertinent question is asked. The mainstream news - BBC, SKY and ITV are no better. The foriegn (non US) channels are our only real means of balancing the UK's media propaganda IMO Cameron and George are looking after their immediate political positions and future job prospects in the city - as in all probability they will be out of office at the next election. If this coalition had any altruistic intentions it would have prosecuted the bankers and related industries - reclaimed their ill gotten gains - introduced a transaction tax and a land value tax. But this cannot happen because the 1% preserve their status via control of the 99% - through oppression and a one sided application of the law - the upper echelons of the judiciary are very likely to be part of the 1%. Cameron is preserving his status and that of others in the same 'class' - we should expect nothing else and as you allude to - we are perhaps stupid to think it could be otherwise. You will notice there has been no serious searching debate on the matters that concern the british people - the reason is clear - an informed population is not in the interests of the ruling juntas. The already meagre prosperity of the 99% is to be decimated further - social contracts will be shredded - in an attempt to make the UK competitive by reducing it's production costs. Slave wages and a compliant subdued ill informed population is the goal of this government. The class system is to be maintained at all costs - a pillar of this objective is globalisation which ensures wages are suppressed and profits maximised with a by product of misery for millions and excess for a chosen few.
  12. Agree. They - the ruling so called elite - are determined to crush living standards and what few 'freedoms' there are left. They fear the escalating social unrest - seen in other countries - and which is very much under reported here. Also - this is an opportunity to try to manipulate public perception into falsely believing it's the poor who are to blame for Britains malaise. Thatchers triumphant destruction of the unions together with the selling off of state assets to the private sector has contributed massively to this mess. 40 years ago they could hold the powerful unions partly to blame for economic woes - now they can't - and have to find another 'enemy of the state' (the poor) - when it should be clear to all that the enemy of the state has been running it for years either as labour or tory. Breathtakingly brazen - with limitless arrogance - they ignore the fact that their class has created the misery that now engulfs us all. No banker or mortgage fraudster prosecutions - while some kid that broke a window or dropped a fire extinguisher get years of gaol time. They seek to exact their perverse vengeance on those already suffering from the actions of this corpulent, overpaid and underworked scum. Some benefit claimants may be work shy - but most rightly want the dignity of a job that pays more than slave wages. The 1% are becoming fearful and rightly so - their time may be up.
  13. Very interesting post. I've given up on the UK media - rely instead on RT news, Al Jazeera, Press TV and even Euronews to reveal what's going on - and of course the Keiser report (on RT news) and on the edge with Max Keiser (PressTV). What dominates our news? drivel from Theresa May about some potential deportee being saved by a cat - a truly pitiful standard of leadership.
×
×
  • 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.