Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sledgehead

Labour Conference: 16 Year Old's Suspect Financial Genes

Recommended Posts

So today was the day when Ed Balls revealed his cunning plan to revive the economy. The conference liked it. Butthen again they liked Gordon Brown's approach to economics and look where that got us. Yep, they love people who haven't clue about finance.

Hardly surprising then that the real star of the day was a fresh-faced 16 year old thumping the tub for more public spending. I think what really won over the hall was not so much his age or naivety however, but his genes.

During the speech he admitted that his parents had been reposessed two years ago from the family home he had grown up in. Taking him at his word (why shouldn't I?), that means his parents owned the house in 1996-97. It's entirely plausible that they lived in the house for 2-3 years before they had him. ither way, we can see that they held the house during the biggest property boom in history. They accumulated 14 years of equity where the average house price rose from £73k to more than £200k. Even after the financial crisis they should still be sitting (if they lived in an average house) on something like £100k of equity.

And yet they got repo'd.

With financial genes like that the lad could easily make Labour party shadow chancellor, and maybe even PM. No wonder they loved him in the hall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hardly surprising then that the real star of the day was a fresh-faced 16 year old thumping the tub for more public spending.

William Hague mk. II?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Taking him at his word (why shouldn't I?), that means his parents owned the house in 1996-97. It's entirely plausible that they lived in the house for 2-3 years before they had him. ither way, we can see that they held the house during the biggest property boom in history. They accumulated 14 years of equity where the average house price rose from £73k to more than £200k. Even after the financial crisis they should still be sitting (if they lived in an average house) on something like £100k of equity.

And yet they got repo'd.

Of course a 16 year old wannabe politician would never lie...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Taking him at his word (why shouldn't I?), that means his parents owned the house in 1996-97. It's entirely plausible that they lived in the house for 2-3 years before they had him. ither way, we can see that they held the house during the biggest property boom in history. They accumulated 14 years of equity where the average house price rose from £73k to more than £200k. Even after the financial crisis they should still be sitting (if they lived in an average house) on something like £100k of equity.

What a surprise. He wants more free money. Twists it the Labour way by saying jobless rate for young was falling under Labour thanks to their Future Jobs or something fund, they sank yet more money into. Wants EMA and all the other Labour benefits back and against cuts in housing benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wants EMA and all the other Labour benefits back and against cuts in housing benefit.

Ed Balls should reprimand him.

Mr Balls has ordered Labour frontbenchers to clear any spending commitments, however small, with him and Ed Miliband

I guess jumped up piss weasels like Rory are exempt from this edict?

Ed Balls won't pledge to reverse coalition cuts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well at least he admitted that the home was repossessed under the Labour government (2 1/2 years ago is what I heard him say). How did that go down with the faithful.

It was hard to be repossessed in those days with all the various benefits and I'm not sure it's that much easier to repossess these days although his claim was that benefits are draconian now but is that supported by the facts. Isn't the Coalition claiming austerity but not doing much yet. It all seems so much bluff by all concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of his pier group won't be getting repossessed as they will never be buying.

Thought most of the piers got burned down in insurance jobs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a surprise. He wants more free money. Twists it the Labour way by saying jobless rate for young was falling under Labour thanks to their Future Jobs or something fund, they sank yet more money into. Wants EMA and all the other Labour benefits back and against cuts in housing benefit.

It pains me to say it, but I thing William Hague did a more enjoyable speech.

Where were the jokes FFS ??????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a surprise. He wants more free money. Twists it the Labour way by saying jobless rate for young was falling under Labour thanks to their Future Jobs or something fund, they sank yet more money into. Wants EMA and all the other Labour benefits back and against cuts in housing benefit.

Oh dear.

It was the last government who put the biggest divide between the young and the old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even after the financial crisis they should still be sitting (if they lived in an average house) on something like £100k of equity.

And yet they got repo'd.

With financial genes like that the lad could easily make Labour party shadow chancellor, and maybe even PM. No wonder they loved him in the hall.

To be fair - you get repo'd if you can't afford the mortgage: doesn't matter how much equity you have. If both his parents lost their jobs, that would do it.

Even though I disagree with Labour's policies, I still thought his speech was excellent for a 16 year old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

During the speech he admitted that his parents had been reposessed two years ago from the family home he had grown up in. Taking him at his word (why shouldn't I?), that means his parents owned the house in 1996-97. It's entirely plausible that they lived in the house for 2-3 years before they had him. ither way, we can see that they held the house during the biggest property boom in history. They accumulated 14 years of equity where the average house price rose from £73k to more than £200k. Even after the financial crisis they should still be sitting (if they lived in an average house) on something like £100k of equity.

And yet they got repo'd.

Exactly my thoughts when I saw it. Other than unfortunate circumstances (illness etc) anyone with a house bought in the 90s should at the very least be able to sell up and rent like millions of others do. I suspect a lot of mewing went on.

My next thought was how cynical of Labour to put the boy on the stage to make that speech. His 5 minutes of fame could lead to some detailed digging by the Mail, Sun etc to find out just why the family had no money, and how much benefits they receive etc. They could end up as a Tory weapon if there are any cracks at all in the tale of a hard working family helped out by the caring labour party.

Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear.

It was the last government who put the biggest divide between the young and the old.

That was pointed out to some Labour delegate at the conference on Radio 5 earlier, it was dismissed straight away as some falacy that did not happen.

It is odd there are so many Labour devotees who seem convinced that 1997 - 2010 simply did not happen - it is like the nasty Tories were in power for a long time and now they are in again and something happened in between that they are not prepared to admit to....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair - you get repo'd if you can't afford the mortgage: doesn't matter how much equity you have. If both his parents lost their jobs, that would do it.

Even though I disagree with Labour's policies, I still thought his speech was excellent for a 16 year old.

But if they bought the house (as was suggested) in 1996/1997 they would have paid a sensible amount for it (back then apparently banks checked salaries and restricted lending).

It surprises me how many people at my work who must have paid naff all for their houses 15/20 years ago yet still have mortgages, if I had bought a flat 10+ years ago - as I tried to do but did not have the permenant contract required for the mortgage I would have most of (if not it all paid back by now...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

During the speech he admitted that his parents had been reposessed two years ago from the family home he had grown up in. Taking him at his word (why shouldn't I?), that means his parents owned the house in 1996-97. It's entirely plausible that they lived in the house for 2-3 years before they had him. ither way, we can see that they held the house during the biggest property boom in history. They accumulated 14 years of equity where the average house price rose from £73k to more than £200k. Even after the financial crisis they should still be sitting (if they lived in an average house) on something like £100k of equity.

Also - he only said "home": it could have been a tiny flat.

And when he said "grown up" in it, that doesn't mean they already owned it when he was born. He could have lived in it from (say) age 4 through to 14 i.e. it was bought in 1999.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno why but I hate all young Politician's. They must have had such a weird upbringing. Are they on some kind of power trip or something? Get back to the 6th Form disco young man!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It pains me to say it, but I thing William Hague did a more enjoyable speech.

Where were the jokes FFS ??????

The jokes were sat on the platform

boom, boom

:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno why but I hate all young Politician's. They must have had such a weird upbringing. Are they on some kind of power trip or something? Get back to the 6th Form disco young man!

You are Anders Breivik and I claim my 5 pounds.

:blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also - he only said "home": it could have been a tiny flat.

And when he said "grown up" in it, that doesn't mean they already owned it when he was born. He could have lived in it from (say) age 4 through to 14 i.e. it was bought in 1999.

He specifically said "born in" if you listen to the speech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quite well delivered speech given his age and the pressure - however that does not conceal the typically self centered content. Though I dont believe it was as good as young William's, and would bet that there are many children who could speak like that after some acting lessons.

He benefitted from various payments such as EMA, housing benefits, and will now have to take out more student debt than before, so surprise surprise, these are the things he complains about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 343 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.