Page 1 of 1

One seven five zero zero zero

Posted: 02 Sep 2008, 16:11
by paint it black
Wouldn’t buy much here…

Is it enough there? :roll:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7592852.stm

Posted: 02 Sep 2008, 16:28
by James Blast
my home is my head, unless it rains

Posted: 02 Sep 2008, 16:40
by markfiend
I blame Thatcher. Selling off the council housing stock just made people think it was a great idea to buy when they couldn't really afford to. And so now we, the taxpayers, are bailing out people who can't afford their mortgages.

Admittedly, paying people's mortgages for them is a better idea than letting them be repossessed / evicted, and then having to clean up that mess.

Posted: 02 Sep 2008, 17:22
by itnAklipse
South of no north :lol:

Posted: 03 Sep 2008, 11:00
by nodubmanshouts
Geez, more nobub bait?Are you guys nodub fishin'? :D :D

Actually, nothing much to disagree with here. Except council houses would have been better sold on a free market as and when they were free.

Got to wonder how long this housing crash will last... the prices drops look bad, but when you take into account inflation, they're bloody awful.

Posted: 03 Sep 2008, 11:04
by markfiend
nodubmanshouts wrote:Except council houses would have been better sold on a free market
Or, you know, used for their intended purpose: providing social housing at rents low enough for low-income people to afford.

We used to have this thing in the UK called "the Welfare State".

Posted: 03 Sep 2008, 11:49
by Harvey Winston
Most of the problem is from wankers who think houses are investments rather than homes.

Lots of buy to let amateur landlords are getting their fingers burnt. good riddance.

this pre-supposes that it is right and proper to own your own home, which I agree with.

Insert rant about landed gentry here too.

insert rant about capitalism being unsustainable.

Posted: 03 Sep 2008, 12:06
by itnAklipse
Err, unfortunately as things stand, houses ARE investments, and you can't blame people trying make money on that. They didn't create the system. Banks have been pushing loans etc etc.

The amateur landlord is no more the enemy than the average person on the street who supports this system and doesn't in my mind deserve any more getting his fingers burnt than anyone else. Which isn't to say much, perhaps, but excludes him being pointed out as some sort of a major culprit.

Actually a friend of mine was thinking of entering the wonderful life of a landlord by buying a few condos, but as i was counting the beans with him we decided it's a very risky undertaking to take a loan and one needs to have experience to actually make money on it. Most probably you need to be a certain kind of SOD who gets loans from banks for virtually no interest at all, but we all know who those are...oops, i guess most of you don't. Oh well. Well, just take a look at the people who own more than their fair share of apartment buildings and such and then make the conclusions you dare...

Oh well, at least i got a few nice bottles of Bordeaux for my troubles on the side...

Posted: 04 Sep 2008, 03:48
by nodubmanshouts
Or, you know, used for their intended purpose: providing social housing at rents low enough for low-income people to afford.
It creates a self fulfilling cycle of economic descent (tm). People who live in low-cost housing have less reason to aim-higher, and thus can never afford non-subsidized housing.

Meanwhile, the real housing pool is smaller for the rest of us, and thus rent goes up...
We used to have this thing in the UK called "the Welfare State".
I hope by that you mean its gone away, coz it was an embarrassment when it existed when I lived in the UK.