Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Democorruptcy

Homeowner Wants Governmint To Pay Their Negative Equity

Recommended Posts

So you are saying that it is wrong that British with other NATO forces stopped the bloody civil war between Northern Alliance and Taliban and they should not start the democratic political process there ...

Perhaps Pakistanis and Iranis were also wrong to fight the Taliban ...

Hmm ...

I am saying that citizens don't get the chance to directly tell their politicians what they want across the entire spectrum of government policies.

What we get instead is citizens either becoming so disillusioned with politics that they don't bother voting at all or people choosing the least worst candidate who they expect will do the least worst job of reflecting their views in policy.

Politicians in power then misinterpret this choice to mean that those who have voted for them agree with everything that they say.

The armed forces should be one of the mechanisms by which the will of the population is expressed. I would prefer the transfer mechanism to be more direct. I take issue with the process. My individual opinions are not really relevant. It is the accurately measured collective opinion of the majority that should matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just looked at the news archives and found the following letter, published in the week the base was opened:

"Dear Sir,

With the opening of the new RAF base there will be a huge increase in demand for local housing. As I've decided to move house and cash-in, I'd like to offer a percentage of the profit to the government.

Yours, Jock McTavish"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I dislike representative democracy and prefer direct democracy, under the current system we have implicitly told them what to do. My hope is that we eventually have more direct democracy which results in fewer (and preferably none) of our young people going off to far away lands and being killed, maimed or emotionally scarred when they return home while the owners of capital in the military / industrial complex earn outsized returns.

Until our democratic system changes, our armed forces deserve a level of support consistent with the potential sacrifices that they are being asked to make and should be at the front of the queue, well ahead of the "scroungers".

They are public employees who seem to think they are doing us a favour. Well, they are not defending this country, they are willing tools for war mongers. If the result is they find out that they have been chumps for the government, then tough luck.

Edited by Peter Hun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are saying that it is wrong that British with other NATO forces stopped the bloody civil war between Northern Alliance and Taliban and they should not start the democratic political process there ...

Perhaps Pakistanis and Iranis were also wrong to fight the Taliban ...

Hmm ...

LOL, good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are public employees who seem to think they are doing us a favour. Well, they are not defending this country, they are willing tools for war mongers. If the result is they find out that they have been chumps for the government, then tough luck.

I am clearly not making my point at all well.

In our current system of government, the general population sees the government as being a distinct entity, seperate from the people. This is the failure of representative democracy. With direct democracy, the government becomes the people and the people become the government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am saying that citizens don't get the chance to directly tell their politicians what they want across the entire spectrum of government policies.

What we get instead is citizens either becoming so disillusioned with politics that they don't bother voting at all or people choosing the least worst candidate who they expect will do the least worst job of reflecting their views in policy.

Politicians in power then misinterpret this choice to mean that those who have voted for them agree with everything that they say.

The armed forces should be one of the mechanisms by which the will of the population is expressed. I would prefer the transfer mechanism to be more direct. I take issue with the process. My individual opinions are not really relevant. It is the accurately measured collective opinion of the majority that should matter.

I do not support the direct democracy at all ...

First of all I am not sure that all citizens are fit to vote anyway .... how can you vote if you do not have any clue how the state and economy work ... for example majority of the homeowners would vote that the government will be responsible for their negative equity .... it is enough that we have populist politicians, who do not have any thought and just blindly follow the people wish ... wrong or right ...

The direct democracy is even worse nonsense ... tell me how many people in the society is able to decide what to do with e.g. nuclear power or foreign policies? .... almost nobody ... we would end up with some lobbying groups, who would be pursuing people, how to vote ... so exactly same as the current political parties ...

I am sorry but average Joe Public is not able to be involved in the direct democracy ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not support the direct democracy at all ...

First of all I am not sure that all citizens are fit to vote anyway .... how can you vote if you do not have any clue how the state and economy work ..

I am sorry but average Joe Public is not able to be involved in the direct democracy ....

I agree 100%. I'd introduce a weighting system dependant on a person's level of education. PhD? - You have the vote of ten thickos. I'm serious too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am clearly not making my point at all well.

In our current system of government, the general population sees the government as being a distinct entity, seperate from the people. This is the failure of representative democracy. With direct democracy, the government becomes the people and the people become the government.

it reminds me that Austrians decided in 80s in the public referendum that they do not want any nuclear power at all ... well done ... they are so green ...

so now they import the nuclear and coal electricity from Czech Republic and low quality brown coal from Poland fore their coal power stations ... very green indeed ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree 100%. I'd introduce a weighting system dependant on a person's level of education. PhD? - You have the vote of ten thickos. I'm serious too.

You have not met a lot of PhD people ... they can be more mental than a rest of population ... for example Marx was quite an educated person ...

Perhaps we should start that if you do not pay a tax you can not vote as you do not contribute to the society ...

I think that the current system with 3 or 4 political parties in the Parliament works quite well. I would just add that you can be a MP only for 2 terms to get some fresh blood to the Parliament ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not support the direct democracy at all ...

First of all I am not sure that all citizens are fit to vote anyway .... how can you vote if you do not have any clue how the state and economy work ... for example majority of the homeowners would vote that the government will be responsible for their negative equity .... it is enough that we have populist politicians, who do not have any thought and just blindly follow the people wish ... wrong or right ...

The direct democracy is even worse nonsense ... tell me how many people in the society is able to decide what to do with e.g. nuclear power or foreign policies? .... almost nobody ... we would end up with some lobbying groups, who would be pursuing people, how to vote ... so exactly same as the current political parties ...

I am sorry but average Joe Public is not able to be involved in the direct democracy ....

Within a democracy, you can only give power to the people or the politicians.

I do not accept the concept that we should hand power to the politicians because they are somehow superior beings who know better than we do about what is good for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are public employees who seem to think they are doing us a favour. Well, they are not defending this country, they are willing tools for war mongers. If the result is they find out that they have been chumps for the government, then tough luck.

first of all if my family needs to be defended for whatever reason I am sure that these people will help them and therefore I admire them!

I am sure that you with your attitude will be more than useless ...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Meantime in the real world (something out of scope of every Guardian subscriber) Chines are selling weapons and buying influence in the Africa .... why? should be British concerned? should British commit to any action? are British going to be still safe in 50 years? will British need a strong Army in 50 years to be able to influence this situation?

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/a-13-Chinese-Weapons-Sales-to-Africa-Raise-Fresh-Concerns.html

http://www.jamestown.org/programs/chinabrief/single/?tx_ttnews[tt_news]=4069&tx_ttnews[backPid]=197&no_cache=1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the current system with 3 or 4 political parties in the Parliament works quite well.

Seriously? A whole generation denied secure, affordable housing (unless they chuck in the job and throw themselves on the mercy of the state), the cost of living rising faster than wages, trillions of pounds of taxpayer money being given to well-connected bankers, the country full steam ahead to national bankruptcy, and whichever major party you vote in the policies do not change... And this is the system working well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have not met a lot of PhD people ... they can be more mental than a rest of population ... for example Marx was quite an educated person ...

Perhaps we should start that if you do not pay a tax you can not vote as you do not contribute to the society ...

I think that the current system with 3 or 4 political parties in the Parliament works quite well. I would just add that you can be a MP only for 2 terms to get some fresh blood to the Parliament ..

I always prefer a free market solution when available. When it is not, I would like to see mitigants in place to counter the monopoly powers that arise.

The idealist in me sees direct democracy as the free market solution.

The realist in me sees representative democracy as the system that we are stuck with. This system gives monopoly powers to politicians. I would like to see these powers curbed as much as possible. Term limits would be a good start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Within a democracy, you can only give power to the people or the politicians.

I do not accept the concept that we should hand power to the politicians because they are somehow superior beings who know better than we do about what is good for us.

they are superior for 4 years, because they have been elected. it is a simple concept ...

if you have the direct democracy people would follow some lobbyist groups anyway ... for example I have no idea, how the tax system or education system should be set up in detail so I would follow a lobbyist group, which want to decrease taxes and give more powers to every citizen ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously? A whole generation denied secure, affordable housing (unless they chuck in the job and throw themselves on the mercy of the state), the cost of living rising faster than wages, trillions of pounds of taxpayer money being given to well-connected bankers, the country full steam ahead to national bankruptcy, and whichever major party you vote in the policies do not change... And this is the system working well?

yes, there is not anything better in the known Universe ...

if Joe Public is not happy, he should vote for somebody else. It is Joe's problem he does not want to change his vote ...

it points again to the fact that the Joe Public is not the most qualified to fit the politicasl process ... but we do not have anything better ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that struck me about this couple is that they have made poor choices from a position that is much better than a lot of others have i.e. most people don't have the option of married quarters.

Six years ago after already having lived together for three years they had three options.

1) Get married and move into married quarters

2) Buy a house

3) Keep renting (unless they lived together with parents then it's stay there or start renting)

They chose 2).

I have had family in that area since 1996 and there has ALWAYS been talk of the airbases shutting down. There are two there that are only about 10 miles apart. Bearing this in mind and where house prices were in 2007 why not chose 1) or 3)? They didn't need to buy a "roof over their head".

Now she talks of being £50k or £60k down on a modest house (perhaps some MEWing?) and wants the governmint to pay for their poor choice.

Why should people who chose 1) or 3) have to contribute their taxes for her poor choice?

To me their attitude is really annoying. I have no pity for these people at all. The trouble is that it seems that anyone who buys property seems to think they have this divine right to be bailed out with other people's money. I suppose in a way government policy has induced this thinking with such as SMI, having the media ramp up house prices and an ongoing lack of financial regulation.

Even now Cameron wants to force* banks and building societies to lend more to military personnel

*they will be chomping at the bit to do it

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-12-08/cameron-to-ask-u-k-banks-to-lend-more-to-military-personnel.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, there is not anything better in the known Universe ...

if Joe Public is not happy, he should vote for somebody else. It is Joe's problem he does not want to change his vote ...

it points again to the fact that the Joe Public is not the most qualified to fit the politicasl process ... but we do not have anything better ...

The risk that seems to be emerging is that none of the main parties represent mainstream thinking. Once the "least worst" choice within the main parties becomes too unpalatable, fringe and / or extremist parties become the "least worst" choice for many and they gain influence.

PR / AV would accelerate this process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should declare my VI. My son hopes to join the armed forces and attend Sandhurst when he finishes uni. He is in his second year now (and a very good athlete) and knows that he will potentially face difficult circumstances in Afghanistan or elsewhere while he is serving.

My view has always been that ex-military, ex-athletes and people who have studied at places like the OU while working are the best people to hire when they reach their early 30s.

I have around a dozen friends/family who have joined the armed forces in the last 5 years. They are all great guys, but they're the first to admit that they joined because they wanted to or because it offered a good career. There may be a small contingent of joiners who did it primarily because they wanted to protect the country, though frankly it will be a very small one.

I wish your son well in his studies and when he joins up. However, if he and the rest of his colleagues want the respect that should come for shouldering the safety of the nation, then they and their supporters should probably stop complaining that they don't get enough financial reward for it. If they don't, it looks like they're just doing it for the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Military personnel are moved around all the time, and they could easily have rented instead of tying themselves down.

Presumaby they were keen to 'get on the property ladder.'

If they had sold the house at a profit. would they be donating the profit to the MOD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter about RAF closures in Scotland

News story including the same couple

It's funny how those hapless 'victims' of events are clearly so skilled at Public Relations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should declare my VI. My son hopes to join the armed forces and attend Sandhurst when he finishes uni. He is in his second year now (and a very good athlete) and knows that he will potentially face difficult circumstances in Afghanistan or elsewhere while he is serving.

My view has always been that ex-military, ex-athletes and people who have studied at places like the OU while working are the best people to hire when they reach their early 30s.

So he is a mercenary then, therefore by his own volition he chose to go out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They chose 2).

I have had family in that area since 1996 and there has ALWAYS been talk of the airbases shutting down. There are two there that are only about 10 miles apart. Bearing this in mind and where house prices were in 2007 why not chose 1) or 3)? They didn't need to buy a "roof over their head".

Now she talks of being £50k or £60k down on a modest house (perhaps some MEWing?) and wants the governmint to pay for their poor choice.

Why should people who chose 1) or 3) have to contribute their taxes for her poor choice?

They are doing the country a favour eh? I'd like to volunteer for the national baby making force, paid for by the taxpayer and with medals for good service and bravery in the face of sex. Give me a house and lots of toys please. Don't to forget to express your gratitude.

Anyone who choose to remain in the forces after 2003/2001 has made a conscious to support an illegal invasion that has directly resulted in one major attack on British civilians. Far from defending us, they have endangered us - deliberately and knowingly - against the wishes of not only the British public but a lot of the Political and military as well.

The military are volunteers, paid to do a job that is nothing to do with defending this country, its about protecting an economic empire. Anyone who did not leave after 2001 has signed up for this plan and doesn't deserve my thanks or support - they are wasting taxpayers money. Who the **** asked them to join up (in this unemployment blackspot..)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Within a democracy, you can only give power to the people or the politicians.

I do not accept the concept that we should hand power to the politicians because they are somehow superior beings who know better than we do about what is good for us.

Agree... however someone needs to be able to make decisions, a leader if you will, as is the nature of our species. As a collective, nothing will ever get done, someone has to decide what direction we are headed.

I guess the answer is to enshrine manifestos in law, and ensure that nothing is hidden from public view.

Share this post


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.

  • 292 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.