Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Multiple Home Owners Are Redesignated By The Telegraph As:


Recommended Posts

I'm enjoying seeing the previously united break ranks. Seems we now have two camps.

Both camps hate brown but it turns out only one of them hates VI property ramping second home ownersTM.

Some complex psychological sh*t, self delusion and cognitive dissonance going on here. Still, got to pin that tail on a donkey, even though you ave no actual idea who it was that kicked you in the first place.

Dumb and dumber.

What's happened to you scepticus..? you come across very bitter/rude of late.

I don't believe it's just a political thing.. something's got your goat good and proper. Would a bit more QE'ing appease you at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm enjoying seeing the previously united break ranks. Seems we now have two camps.

Both camps hate brown but it turns out only one of them hates VI property ramping second home ownersTM.

Some complex psychological sh*t, self delusion and cognitive dissonance going on here. Still, got to pin that tail on a donkey, even though you ave no actual idea who it was that kicked you in the first place.

Dumb and dumber.

You know more or less nowt about me, and vice versa. Please keep your bile to yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The circular rationale again

There are no proper returns on production precisely because people are using to housing to screw over production

Please take a moment to visualise this

My dad lost money in equitable. Was advised to opt out serps and lost money in endowments. He also never had the money to buy privatised shares.

When i explain to him and my mother how the properties they bought instead have crippled my generation they understand and accept that (my mam near cries).

They (and i encouraged them so we) didnt know what we were doing.

Should we feel guilty and if so how do i make amends?

Genuine question

Link to post
Share on other sites

It might well have been a good thing to do from a purely selfish point of view, but then so can mugging someone for their cash.

What a rubbish comparison.

Imagine a market stall, loaded with strawberries. You buy some in the morning.

Are you in fact, by your action, depriving the later comers the chance to eat strawberries?

Better still, think of the unmentionable metal. Like houses, it is in finite supply. If you buy some, you help push the price up. Are you "mugging" the other people who might wish to buy the unmentionable metal later?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess You chose to be self-employed. Hope the choice was an informed one.

A couple of pros & contras which immediately spring to mind

(2) Your SIPP contributions are topped up by govt up to your tax amount paid in that particular year. If You want property exposure, buy REITs with your SIPP money.

(3) You can buy BTL only with after-tax money but You can gear. However, you have to pay tax on BTL profits after mortgage interest/maintenance/agent fees/etc.

Gross yeild - possibly. Net yeild - I doubt that. And cashing in means paying CGT.

You need to pay tax on your pension when it eventually gets paid out as well.

SIPPS are the biggest waste of time ever.

Far better usuing your maximum ISA allowance first (10,200) then if you want to invest more put it into a SIPP (or a VCT).

Yes, your ISA is paid from post tax income but the pay out at the end is tax free and the government can change the SIPP rules at any point.

Also, paying money into your ISA keeps it liquid so even if it is fully invested you can get it all back as you please. e.g. if you wake up one morning and say "****** it i'm quitting my job, buying a ferrarri and driving round the world in it" or whatever floats your boat an ISA is the only investment that will allow you to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My dad lost money in equitable. Was advised to opt out serps and lost money in endowments. He also never had the money to buy privatised shares.

When i explain to him and my mother how the properties they bought instead have crippled my generation they understand and accept that (my mam near cries).

They (and i encouraged them so we) didnt know what we were doing.

Should we feel guilty and if so how do i make amends?

Genuine question

you shouldn't feel guilty. There are no genuinely needy people in this country. Poor people are fat.... that says it all. Go to a deprived country and you will see that poor people are skinny.

If you want to do something good donate money to a charity. The best charity is random charity but any charity will do. Remember to gift aid it and claim higher rate tax relief in your return

The UK is so up it's own ****. People don't know how good they have it because expectations are so stupid. Go to other countries where people live in shacks and are self sufficient and they are happy but in this country you need a plasma tv, new car and must own a house to be happy. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to pay tax on your pension when it eventually gets paid out as well.

SIPPS are the biggest waste of time ever.

jeesus you're daft

tax advantage of SIPPS lies in the fact that you can live comfortably on less income when retired, so you tend to be in a lower income tax bracket as you will take a lower pension than your salary used to be, therefore the tax advantage of a pension is quite significant

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which kind of brings us back to the point that some of the more "abstract" thinkers on this board are always banging on about: the fundamental problem is a "credit bubble", LIAR LOAN BUBBLE too much savings sloshing around the system, and the only way to get any return on these savings is to plough them into something where you have supply-side restrictions: e.g. land* or energy*,,,,,,,/

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a rubbish comparison.

Actually no, it isn't a rubbish comparison at all

The only way you could be enriched simply by holding houses is if people were somehow prevented from housing themselves and so people end up paying you to overcome the restrictions placed on them. By holding houses to make money you are quite deliberately taking a role in the mechanism that prevents them housing themselves. Holding people's right to house themselves hostage, so they have to pay you to do nothing for them, is mugging people. Price speculation in real estate is using a loophole in our land tenure system to mug people

Imagine a market stall, loaded with strawberries. You buy some in the morning.

Are you in fact, by your action, depriving the later comers the chance to eat strawberries?

People can supply themselves with strawberries simply by growing them; people cannot supply themselves with housing because a chief component of housing isn't / can't in reality be supplied by anyone - it can only be bought from an 'owner'. This is one reason you are unlikely to make a killing by holding strawberries for twenty years

Better still, think of the unmentionable metal. Like houses, it is in finite supply. If you buy some, you help push the price up. Are you "mugging" the other people who might wish to buy the unmentionable metal later?

Gold is being collectedfrom nature continuously and people do not have to live and work on or in gold

Edited by Stars
Link to post
Share on other sites

You would think with all the money and "investment" that's gone into property that property products would have advanced at a rapid rate and possibly even become better value for money i.e central heating, doors, glazing and so on - as well as the basic property construction.

But no they're still stuck in pre boom days with little or no advance indeed in many ways they've gone backwards.

If you look at some things like central heating devices the devices for people to adjust the heating temperature and periods of heating etc have gone backward and are very poorly designed with no thought given to make them easy to read and use.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My dad lost money in equitable. Was advised to opt out serps and lost money in endowments. He also never had the money to buy privatised shares.

When i explain to him and my mother how the properties they bought instead have crippled my generation they understand and accept that (my mam near cries).

They (and i encouraged them so we) didnt know what we were doing.

Should we feel guilty and if so how do i make amends?

Genuine question

Not guilty. Why? because its the system, ie the collective of the government and those that influence them the most, the bankers and big business etc that funnel you into whatever it is they want you to invest in. The banks went for BTL and 100% mortgages in order to ramp up lending and thus personal bonuses etc, the government went along with this as it made people feel rich with the associated HPI, consiquently spending more on 'stuff'. What else would they have done? in retrospect the wisest move and certianly no one did it with todays FTBers problems as an objective in mind. The fault is ultimately with the government who could have killed this thing dead years ago and the total lack of other real investments and certainly after the dot.com crash, little faith in the city slickers who stood over that nonsensical mania. Problem weve got is that both sides of politics are the same, both are up to their necks in it and lack and interest or imagination re the real economy and needs of society.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually no, it isn't a rubbish comparison at all

The only way you could be enriched simply by holding houses is if people were somehow prevented from housing themselves and so people end up paying you to overcome the restrictions placed on them. By holding houses to make money you are quite deliberately taking a role in the mechanism that prevents them housing themselves. Holding people's right to house themselves hostage, so they have to pay you to do nothing for them, is mugging people. Price speculation in real estate is using a loophole in our land tenure system to mug people

People can supply themselves with strawberries simply by growing them; people cannot supply themselves with housing because a chief component of housing isn't / can't in reality be supplied by anyone - it can only be bought from an 'owner'. This is one reason you are unlikely to make a killing by holding strawberries for twenty years

Gold is being collectedfrom nature continuously and people do not have to live and work on or in gold

By owning multiple houses, how do I prevent you from housing yourself??

Link to post
Share on other sites

By owning multiple houses, how do I prevent you from housing yourself??

By increasing demand and almost certainly prices thus preventing self ownership. I know one almost retired couple who have made a fortune over the last 10 years or so buying new build houses, leaving them empty (didn't want anyone making a mess of them) then selling them on a few years later and using the profits to buy more.

Against that kind of competition it is no wonder so many have been left high and dry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at some things like central heating devices the devices for people to adjust the heating temperature and periods of heating etc have gone backward and are very poorly designed with no thought given to make them easy to read and use.

That is an excellent point. There is a central heating system in my rented flat and I was in a few months ago when the man came to service it. I got the impression that he had been to this property several times in the past and asked me if I had worked out how to use the timer on the heating. I said no but it didnt really matter as I rarely use the heating. He then confessed that he had never been able to work it out either and was hoping I would show him :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

By owning multiple houses, how do I prevent you from housing yourself??

The house / land ownership you take on forms part of the barrier to other people housing themselves because part of the property (land /location) is irreplaceable by production (it isn't produced). Because we are talking about a fixed supply(of said land/location), if you hadn’t bought as an investment that barrier to others would be slightly lower. In other words, by engaging in your behaviour, you raise costs for others by increasing the barrier that prevents them housing themselves. In fact, if you are engaging in real estate price speculation, this is essentially your ‘business’ plan. Almost uniquely in the business world, real estate price speculation is an overt and specific attempt to do absolutely nothing at all but inflict costs on other people.

Edited by Stars
Link to post
Share on other sites
<br />you shouldn't feel guilty. There are no genuinely needy people in this country. Poor people are fat.... that says it all. Go to a deprived country and you will see that poor people are skinny.<br /><br />If you want to do something good donate money to a charity. The best charity is random charity but any charity will do. Remember to gift aid it and claim higher rate tax relief in your return<br /><br />The UK is so up it's own ****. People don't know how good they have it because expectations are so stupid. Go to other countries where people live in shacks and are self sufficient and they are happy but in this country you need a plasma tv, new car and must own a house to be happy. Stupid, stupid, stupid.<br />
<br /><br /><br />

You just don't 'get it' do you?

The authorities have created the phobias about letting kids out to play, everyone in the street is a walking pervert, no more walk to skool etc like loads of us used to!

They took away uniformed officers off the estates(saying there was NO more money - (yet they now spend £Billions a year now on their 60,000+ 'Specials' local spy people) to create hell holes as the minority estate scum took over and terrorised the rest of the decent people who wanted to live in peace.

The authorites in the UK allow Big Business to load all the cheap foodstuffs and the takeaways (fish 'n chips) (that the POOR tend to buy) with TRANSFATS which are BANNED in some euro-countries they are so poisonous! They create huge cardiovascular problems over time!

People used to live on fish and chips cooked in Lard and you never saw the obesity problems! Thoses same people are now in their 70', 80' 90's living longer than ever!

Do you believe the GOVT sponsered crap they tell you to switch from butter/lard to eating TRANSFAT ridden MARGARINES? That's EXACTLY what they planned on you doing!

This is done on purpose to overload the NHS - which 'they' eventually want to destroy/privatise! (the city just can't help helping themselves to those bonuses and kickbacks from privatisation of public utilities or breaking up large UK businesses!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The house / land ownership you take on forms part of the barrier to other people housing themselves because part of the property (land /location) is irreplaceable by production (it isn't produced). Because we are talking about a fixed supply(of said land/location), if you hadn’t bought as an investment that barrier to others would be slightly lower. In other words, by engaging in your behaviour, you raise costs for others by increasing the barrier that prevents them housing themselves. In fact, if you are engaging in real estate price speculation, this is essentially your ‘business’ plan. Almost uniquely in the business world, real estate price speculation is an overt and specific attempt to do absolutely nothing at all but inflict costs on other people.

Guess we must agree on how to walk before we try to run.

Open primer, chapter 1: Where do I find the law that says I must curb/modify my buying/ownership behaviour so as to benefit you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My dad lost money in equitable. Was advised to opt out serps and lost money in endowments. He also never had the money to buy privatised shares.

When i explain to him and my mother how the properties they bought instead have crippled my generation they understand and accept that (my mam near cries).

They (and i encouraged them so we) didnt know what we were doing.

Should we feel guilty and if so how do i make amends?

Genuine question

You have touched on something here that should make a lot of the younger generation unable to live with themselves, because a big proportion of btl and second house owners will probably have done it for their future generation. Now you have developed a conscionce i suppose the best thing to do is make them give all their properties value to charity. Preferably a social housing charity. Then you can look on in great satisfaction knowing that your parents did it for a good cause.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have touched on something here that should make a lot of the younger generation unable to live with themselves, because a big proportion of btl and second house owners will probably have done it for their future generation. Now you have developed a conscionce i suppose the best thing to do is make them give all their properties value to charity. Preferably a social housing charity. Then you can look on in great satisfaction knowing that your parents did it for a good cause.

And in fact, anyone who saved money with a bank or building society in the last 20 years has had a guilty hand in providing the cash to BTL and second owner mortgages. YOU are all guilty of aiding and abeting this heinous crime, and thus all are as guilty as the ones who did it. If you felt so bad about it over the last 20 years or so, why did you all not invest your money in something that avoided lending on property.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/budget-2010-cgt-changes-will-hit-vast-majority-of-property-investors-tele-982c0d9d7972.html?x=0

It (new 28% CGT rate)
will catch all those hard working families who opted for a second home
often as an alternative to risking their pension planning in equities. The new system will mean lumpy gains from sales of large assets will push those on lower incomes into the higher 28 per cent CGT bracket."

We live in a very sick society.

I think 28% is a fair rate (18% probably too low) and remember that there is no taper, so a good chunk of the gain could be inflation and after CGT rate return adjusted for inflation could well be negative. 40%, 50% etc taxes are far too high anyway and perhaps we should aim to have noone having to pay more than 33% of their income (so 1/3 for the society, 1/3 for self and family and 1/3 for the future).

Link to post
Share on other sites

By increasing demand and almost certainly prices thus preventing self ownership. I know one almost retired couple who have made a fortune over the last 10 years or so buying new build houses, leaving them empty (didn't want anyone making a mess of them) then selling them on a few years later and using the profits to buy more.

Against that kind of competition it is no wonder so many have been left high and dry.

Of course, silly me! :rolleyes:

I'll market my properties tomorrow for a pound, to increase supply, to push prices down, to make it easy for you to buy.

Better still, as you're a nice person, come and live for free, and I'll pay all your outgoings too. :lol::lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardworking Families was always doublespeak, anyway, a kind of a shield for them to deflect truth seeking questions with. It's now a little overused by political and media spin merchants, but served them well through the last few years - especially GB. Eventually they'll have to stop using it, it won't be long before it becomes a joke. I wouldn't be surprised to hear a stand up comedian using it already actually. Then they'll just have to blue-sky-think a new doublespeak word or phrase.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And in fact, anyone who saved money with a bank or building society in the last 20 years has had a guilty hand in providing the cash to BTL and second owner mortgages. YOU are all guilty of aiding and abeting this heinous crime, and thus all are as guilty as the ones who did it. If you felt so bad about it over the last 20 years or so, why did you all not invest your money in something that avoided lending on property.

Total poo!

If your logic were correct, then all who pay tax have blood on their hands (think govs funding wars using your money).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • 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.