Wheres My 40k

[lewissheridan]

these are homes, not investment playthings.

my sentiments exactly

[StainlessSteelCat]

[APPLAUSE]

This whole thread is reading like some bizarre end of year comedy review - except the subject ain't funny.

Seriously though - nice posts, guys/gals.

[ThePiltdownMan]

I read your posts. It seems that your basic point was that the euro money supply rate is 8% and everyone in Euroland is worried but the sterling money supply rate is 10-12% and nobody in the UK cares. What is the money supply rate, the rate at which new currency units are being created? What is the relationship between the money supply and inflation? If the money supply rate is 10% why isn't inflation 10%? Where does one find these figures?

You need to factor in GDP growth and interest rates as well

[paradox]

This has got to be the most entertaining thread ever.

FWIW I am with Fred on this one. I well remember arguing with my dad when I was 22 that being on the dole was a right and not a privilege. A civilised society should provide the option of not working. Payment for not working should be minimal, but it should be above starvation levels.

Anyone who wants to not work should be able to do so. They will then be free to write poetry, lay about, scrounge, have babies or study.

Therefore the mimimum wage that an employer will need to offer should be sufficiently above this mimimal existence level in order to attract people to the world of work.

Of course, not everybody will choose not to work. Status, money, getting out of the house, ambition, career, self esteem, greed, fear will all combine to ensure that the vast majority of people will work. Nobody will get rich or get on by not working, but they will survive. Who knows, they might dream up a reality game show during their spare time and 'make it' that way.

The only rider on this is that the tax and benefit system would have to be adjusted so that moonlighting was strictly punished. All work should be taxed and anybody claiming right-not-to-work benefit whilst working on the side would suffer severe consequences. They would lose their right to opt out of the labour market for a period of time, say 2 years and they would be denied all benefits during this period.

Fight for the right not to work

[right_freds_dead]

would 'quizmania' be regarded as reality tv ?

[BricksandMortar]

thats all very well for paintings, but your local ambulance crew cant live in a john wheeler abstract landscape.

these are homes, not investment playthings.

no they can't but what they could do, is buy when they can afford to and when the time is right move onwards and upwards and who knows they could be looking at a real life landscape outside their back door.

(I have personal experience, having started life in an attic flat, then a council flat on the 10th floor, then our first own home filled with hand me down furniture - now I'm where I want to be, through sheer hard work - don't knock it!)

[johnnyw]

no they can't but what they could do, is buy when they can afford to and when the time is right move onwards and upwards and who knows they could be looking at a real life landscape outside their back door.

(I have personal experience, having started life in an attic flat, then a council flat on the 10th floor, then our first own home filled with hand me down furniture - now I'm where I want to be, through sheer hard work - don't knock it!)

Well said.

[frugalista]

You need to factor in GDP growth and interest rates as well

Okay, I see the connection to GDP growth. If there is 5% more business in existence, then 5% added to the money supply is not expected to be inflationary as it is required as a means of exchange for the new business. Only money supply on top of this can be expected to be inflationary.

However, I don't understand how interest rates play a part in deducing inflation from money supply. I thought they were just the mechanism by which the money supply is turned up and down, like the twisty bit of a tap.

frugalista

[Casual Observer]

This has got to be the most entertaining thread ever.

FWIW I am with Fred on this one. I well remember arguing with my dad when I was 22 that being on the dole was a right and not a privilege. A civilised society should provide the option of not working. Payment for not working should be minimal, but it should be above starvation levels.

You haven't explained your reasoning behind your argument (that people who wish not to work should be paid by the state). What are they?

[BricksandMortar]

You haven't explained your reasoning behind your argument (that people who wish not to work should be paid by the state). What are they?

scroungers?

[AgeingBabyBoomer]

no they can't but what they could do, is buy when they can afford to and when the time is right move onwards and upwards and who knows they could be looking at a real life landscape outside their back door.

(I have personal experience, having started life in an attic flat, then a council flat on the 10th floor, then our first own home filled with hand me down furniture - now I'm where I want to be, through sheer hard work - don't knock it!)

Hard work indeed - however, you must realise that 90% of your efforts have benefitted

the peolpe from whom you bought the property - very little of your profit is returned to you.

Your own resources are working very hard to pay off the windfall gains

in land value enjoyed by the previous owner.

That owner expended no effort to achieve those gains - you did.

ABB

[BricksandMortar]

Hard work indeed - however, you must realise that 90% of your efforts have benefitted

the peolpe from whom you bought the property - very little of your profit is returned to you.

Your own resources are working very hard to pay off the windfall gains

in land value enjoyed by the previous owner.

That owner expended no effort to achieve those gains - you did.

ABB

actually you're wrong. We bought our last house in 1987 from an old lady (without the obligatory fancy new kitchen and bathroom or indeed central heating) and the following year prices soared, we continued to see our 'investment' rise and we sold it last year and downsized considerably (3 grown up kids finally doing their own thing) to our teeny cottage with that rural backdrop, so we have in fact cashed in on our hard work and good luck

[AgeingBabyBoomer]

actually you're wrong. We bought our last house in 1987 from an old lady (without the obligatory fancy new kitchen and bathroom or indeed central heating) and the following year prices soared, we continued to see our 'investment' rise and we sold it last year and downsized considerably (3 grown up kids finally doing their own thing) to our teeny cottage with that rural backdrop, so we have in fact cashed in on our hard work and good luck

So which is it, hard work or good luck?

Suppose you bought in 1991, worked equally hard, and watched the value of your property collapse?

Hard work or bad luck?

ABB

[munro]

You haven't explained your reasoning behind your argument (that people who wish not to work should be paid by the state). What are they?

Wastefully deployed productive units? Since we pay set-aside for agricultural land, why not for people too?

Here's a thought for 2006 - start paying people not to work so they don't contribute so much to trashing the environment. Also they free up resources for others who want to do more consuming to consume. What could be more reasonable than that? If we are going to have to adapt to peak oil in the not too distant future, why not start now by winding down the frenetic level of our economic activity, lie back, relax, take it easy, and create a bit less pollution while we're at it?

Maybe constructive dossing will be the new black in 2006 - hey don't knock it, I'm told many great rock bands and other inventive/artistic types cut their teeth while claiming the dole.

[BricksandMortar]

So which is it, hard work or good luck?

Suppose you bought in 1991, worked equally hard, and watched the value of your property collapse?

Hard work or bad luck?

ABB

well we were able to buy the house in the first place by hard work and it was 'good luck' that we bought when we did - c'est la vie!

We found it hard when the interest rates went up to 15+% - but we worked hard, did without and survived and ultimately reaped the benefits.

IMO these days some people aren't just happy with the bricks and mortar, they want everything in it, all brand spanking new, the show home, that's unrealistic - mighty oaks from little acorns grow.

[GCS15]

definetley not usa dollars and austrailian dollars then ?

Australia's motto is "all the way with the USA" . If you have ANY misgivings at all about the US economy then Aussie $$$ is not for you. We are in the process of adopting ALL of their practices even the ones with a proven track record for being a social failure -> :angry:

[paradox]

You haven't explained your reasoning behind your argument (that people who wish not to work should be paid by the state). What are they?

The reasons are quite simple. In earlier times we were hunter gatherers. Then a sort of division of labour set in in women tended crops to produce the veg whilst men went out to get the Sunday joint of meat. Kids milked the cows to make the Yorkshire puddings.

Then later urban society developed. The words civilisation, civil, city, and citizen are all linked. They related to the growth of towns.

This presented a totally new scenario as it meant that there was enough agricultural surplus for some people to survive without working in agriculture. These new non farmers can be divided into two groups.

Firstly the non farmers who serviced the business of existence and reproduction of the species. This first group includes blacksmiths who made ploughs, horseshoes etc, coopers who made barrels, taylors who made clothes and anybody else who made something that helped people to produce food, eat food, keep warm and have babies.

The second group of non farmers were less productive. These included the priests, politicians, doctors, singers, poets, fortune tellers, gossip mongers etc. These people could now exist in greater numbers because society was producing a surplus and people could exist without producing food and without producing useful goods. This second group has always been valued. The ancient philosophers considered the existence of this second group to be essential to a civilised society. Indeed in Ancient Greece and Rome free men didnt work, work was considered demeaning - something to be left to slaves. Instead it was this latter group who consitituted the citizens. The workers were just slaves.

Under developed capitalism a new division has arisen. Large enterprises produce goods. Agriculture is now removed from every day life (I am referring to the UK here). The citizen is largely replaced by the consumer. We are what we own and we are where we live. We can no longer say "I think, therefore I am". Instead it is more like "I buy, therefore I am"

Ok we still have a large public sector, but these people are not producing ideas, wisdom, music, poems, orgies, and cooking fantastic meals. Instead they are pen pushing and managing the complexity of society, including sorting out the lives of consumers who are unable to consume enough and therefore depend on the state for benefits of some sort or other (including health and education). This carries on because we believe it is civilised to provide free health and education, and we believe it is civilised to support people in poverty.

But we have forgotten the original meaning of civilisation. It is not to support poor people. It is to free people from demeaning work and instead to allow them to fulfill their humanity by lounging on sofas and eating grapes. Yes - that is what the ancients called civilisation.

Now - most people have been indoctrinated by the protestant work ethic that came along with capitalism. Especially in the Anglo Saxon countries work is seen as good, noble, healthy and the right thing to do. During period of unemployment people (including myself) feel depressed because they are not taking part in the world of work.

Most people feel this way, and most people will continue to feel this way. Therefore most will want to work for most of their lives.

However if we are to be truly civilised we should allow for the minority who are not indocrinated with the work ethic. We dont complain if our taxes are spent on the military, the police, hospitals and schools. We dont complain because we believe that these things are essential for a civilised society. Therefore we should also not complain if our taxes are spent on the minority who for one reason or another want to drop out of the rat race and read a few books.

That would be civilised.

I repeat. There are two conditions that would have to be applied to make this work.

1) No moonlighting and strict punishment of moonlighting. All work to be taxed (or at least registered) and moonlighters to be excluded from benefits.

2) No entitlement to this system for those who are not fully incorporated in the UK. It would only apply to UK citizens. The state would also have to make sure that people like me dont work abroad and then nip back to claim my scroungers allowance for a few years before going off again.

However there are always these complications and exceptions to every system. For the vast majority it would apply without any problems. And yes, as a poster mentioned above, it would be a green and environmental option. Leaving work to those who want to be productive and avoiding wasteful office space, factory space, bus journeys and general hassle for those who want to stay in bed all day.

[Justice]

Taxes will go up but wages will not add to inflation as immigrants are taking all the jobs, lets hope they send the money home as this results in less money supply.

i wana move to poland

[Without_a_Paddle]

The reasons are quite simple. In earlier times we were hunter gatherers. Then a sort of division of labour set in in women tended crops to produce the veg whilst men went out to get the Sunday joint of meat. Kids milked the cows to make the Yorkshire puddings.

Then later urban society developed. The words civilisation, civil, city, and citizen are all linked. They related to the growth of towns.

This presented a totally new scenario as it meant that there was enough agricultural surplus for some people to survive without working in agriculture. These new non farmers can be divided into two groups.

Firstly the non farmers who serviced the business of existence and reproduction of the species. This first group includes blacksmiths who made ploughs, horseshoes etc, coopers who made barrels, taylors who made clothes and anybody else who made something that helped people to produce food, eat food, keep warm and have babies.

The second group of non farmers were less productive. These included the priests, politicians, doctors, singers, poets, fortune tellers, gossip mongers etc. These people could now exist in greater numbers because society was producing a surplus and people could exist without producing food and without producing useful goods. This second group has always been valued. The ancient philosophers considered the existence of this second group to be essential to a civilised society. Indeed in Ancient Greece and Rome free men didnt work, work was considered demeaning - something to be left to slaves. Instead it was this latter group who consitituted the citizens. The workers were just slaves.

Under developed capitalism a new division has arisen. Large enterprises produce goods. Agriculture is now removed from every day life (I am referring to the UK here). The citizen is largely replaced by the consumer. We are what we own and we are where we live. We can no longer say "I think, therefore I am". Instead it is more like "I buy, therefore I am"

Ok we still have a large public sector, but these people are not producing ideas, wisdom, music, poems, orgies, and cooking fantastic meals. Instead they are pen pushing and managing the complexity of society, including sorting out the lives of consumers who are unable to consume enough and therefore depend on the state for benefits of some sort or other (including health and education). This carries on because we believe it is civilised to provide free health and education, and we believe it is civilised to support people in poverty.

But we have forgotten the original meaning of civilisation. It is not to support poor people. It is to free people from demeaning work and instead to allow them to fulfill their humanity by lounging on sofas and eating grapes. Yes - that is what the ancients called civilisation.

Now - most people have been indoctrinated by the protestant work ethic that came along with capitalism. Especially in the Anglo Saxon countries work is seen as good, noble, healthy and the right thing to do. During period of unemployment people (including myself) feel depressed because they are not taking part in the world of work.

Most people feel this way, and most people will continue to feel this way. Therefore most will want to work for most of their lives.

However if we are to be truly civilised we should allow for the minority who are not indocrinated with the work ethic. We dont complain if our taxes are spent on the military, the police, hospitals and schools. We dont complain because we believe that these things are essential for a civilised society. Therefore we should also not complain if our taxes are spent on the minority who for one reason or another want to drop out of the rat race and read a few books.

That would be civilised.

I repeat. There are two conditions that would have to be applied to make this work.

1) No moonlighting and strict punishment of moonlighting. All work to be taxed (or at least registered) and moonlighters to be excluded from benefits.

2) No entitlement to this system for those who are not fully incorporated in the UK. It would only apply to UK citizens. The state would also have to make sure that people like me dont work abroad and then nip back to claim my scroungers allowance for a few years before going off again.

However there are always these complications and exceptions to every system. For the vast majority it would apply without any problems. And yes, as a poster mentioned above, it would be a green and environmental option. Leaving work to those who want to be productive and avoiding wasteful office space, factory space, bus journeys and general hassle for those who want to stay in bed all day.

If this is your way of dealing with being a lazy dropout then fine. It's probably healthier than taking anti depressants and it costs the state less money on prescriptions.

[Time to raise the rents.]

i was posting along today when ive hit a dire thought.

since 2001 ive managed to save 40k.

i went to buy a house which was 75k in 2001 and its now £140k. its the same house.

can someone tell me what happens to my 40ks worth of hard work ?

Yes, I borrowed your 40k to buy houses with. You should be satisfied as you received the interest I paid so far and that is what you expected when you put your money in the bank, so I haven't let you down.

Edited January 2, 2006 by Time to raise the rents.

[right_freds_dead]

Yes, I borrowed your 40k to buy houses with. You should be satisfied as you received the interest I paid so far and that is what you expected when you put your money in the bank, so I haven't let you down.

hes right in a roundabout way.

-lets get him....

[paradox]

If this is your way of dealing with being a lazy dropout then fine. It's probably healthier than taking anti depressants and it costs the state less money on prescriptions.

Unfortunately mate I am stuck in the middle of the rat race trying to run a small consultancy business and complete a PhD.

I was remaniscing about the good old days when I had nothing to do all day

[Without_a_Paddle]

Unfortunately mate I am stuck in the middle of the rat race trying to run a small consultancy business and complete a PhD.

That's funny, You didn't give that impression. See your quote below:

The state would also have to make sure that people like me dont work abroad and then nip back to claim my scroungers allowance for a few years before going off again.

You also said:

During period of unemployment people (including myself) feel depressed because they are not taking part in the world of work.

I was remaniscing about the good old days when I had nothing to do all day

Some confusion for me here, I'm afraid. The good old days? Of depression?

Yes, I borrowed your 40k to buy houses with. You should be satisfied as you received the interest I paid so far and that is what you expected when you put your money in the bank, so I haven't let you down.

Nice one.

[right_freds_dead]

i was recently thinking about the tory years as i was driving homelast night. i took a detour past my old stomping ground in salford and remembered how, when i first came here it was not so good to walk about at night. there was no money about. it seemed crime ridden.

now its a lot more lively. is this the result of the boom ?

it a vibrant area now. almost all of it former social wasteland.

perhaps were wrong and weve been blinkered. though saying that. its cost me personally £40k.

id have preferred larger taxes for all and no housing boom. though i can say i can clearly see good results in labours policy. (if it was a policy). the place is not 100% ideal for an ex-ofordite with a perchance for real ale and punting. but compared to how salford was in the very late 90s - its a lot better.

[Fudge]

The reasons are quite simple. In earlier times we were hunter gatherers. Then a sort of division of labour set in in women tended crops to produce the veg whilst men went out to get the Sunday joint of meat. Kids milked the cows to make the Yorkshire puddings.

Then later urban society developed. The words civilisation, civil, city, and citizen are all linked. They related to the growth of towns.

This presented a totally new scenario as it meant that there was enough agricultural surplus for some people to survive without working in agriculture. These new non farmers can be divided into two groups.

Firstly the non farmers who serviced the business of existence and reproduction of the species. This first group includes blacksmiths who made ploughs, horseshoes etc, coopers who made barrels, taylors who made clothes and anybody else who made something that helped people to produce food, eat food, keep warm and have babies.

The second group of non farmers were less productive. These included the priests, politicians, doctors, singers, poets, fortune tellers, gossip mongers etc. These people could now exist in greater numbers because society was producing a surplus and people could exist without producing food and without producing useful goods. This second group has always been valued. The ancient philosophers considered the existence of this second group to be essential to a civilised society. Indeed in Ancient Greece and Rome free men didnt work, work was considered demeaning - something to be left to slaves. Instead it was this latter group who consitituted the citizens. The workers were just slaves.

Under developed capitalism a new division has arisen. Large enterprises produce goods. Agriculture is now removed from every day life (I am referring to the UK here). The citizen is largely replaced by the consumer. We are what we own and we are where we live. We can no longer say "I think, therefore I am". Instead it is more like "I buy, therefore I am"

Ok we still have a large public sector, but these people are not producing ideas, wisdom, music, poems, orgies, and cooking fantastic meals. Instead they are pen pushing and managing the complexity of society, including sorting out the lives of consumers who are unable to consume enough and therefore depend on the state for benefits of some sort or other (including health and education). This carries on because we believe it is civilised to provide free health and education, and we believe it is civilised to support people in poverty.

But we have forgotten the original meaning of civilisation. It is not to support poor people. It is to free people from demeaning work and instead to allow them to fulfill their humanity by lounging on sofas and eating grapes. Yes - that is what the ancients called civilisation.

Now - most people have been indoctrinated by the protestant work ethic that came along with capitalism. Especially in the Anglo Saxon countries work is seen as good, noble, healthy and the right thing to do. During period of unemployment people (including myself) feel depressed because they are not taking part in the world of work.

Most people feel this way, and most people will continue to feel this way. Therefore most will want to work for most of their lives.

However if we are to be truly civilised we should allow for the minority who are not indocrinated with the work ethic. We dont complain if our taxes are spent on the military, the police, hospitals and schools. We dont complain because we believe that these things are essential for a civilised society. Therefore we should also not complain if our taxes are spent on the minority who for one reason or another want to drop out of the rat race and read a few books.

That would be civilised.

I repeat. There are two conditions that would have to be applied to make this work.

1) No moonlighting and strict punishment of moonlighting. All work to be taxed (or at least registered) and moonlighters to be excluded from benefits.

2) No entitlement to this system for those who are not fully incorporated in the UK. It would only apply to UK citizens. The state would also have to make sure that people like me dont work abroad and then nip back to claim my scroungers allowance for a few years before going off again.

However there are always these complications and exceptions to every system. For the vast majority it would apply without any problems. And yes, as a poster mentioned above, it would be a green and environmental option. Leaving work to those who want to be productive and avoiding wasteful office space, factory space, bus journeys and general hassle for those who want to stay in bed all day.

Good post, but as I understand it the idea of welfare was to pay a part of your wages in N.I. as a safety net if

for a genuine reason people were not able to work, including ourselves.

Not to support this concept of civilization.