Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

I think that i will leave this thread alone now as getting too heated:erm:

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

It's all down to money in the end of day, the people that are retired & now needing the money for keep now even the same (people) ones that got the housing market in this state, over heating the market - prices!
It's well known with council tax it goes up but never goes down so there a big clue to where, the housing boom got us - a sticky place, should I or should I not. They all want to make a profit in end of the day not a big loss. (Which most likely said do when interest rates go up & public sector cuts come into effect) It's said that house prices need to go down another @15% to balance the whole market out, not the other way (up).

Well, the campaign may work but will be there down fall when the area housing market goes bang when all the buyers dry up or people start to lose there over priced homes after no-one able to afford the rates etc.It's only going to take one part of the market to drop, then it going to go bang much bigger this time - this time the government won't even cover any mortgage payments, just the people that have spent well + broke, just paying off the interest on the mortgage to perosons that are able to pay the maximum total each month with their own cash not credit card or loan.

It was the people that over borrowed in the first place + over spent on a over priced property in the first place that going sink us all, not now but the coming future for all of us.

Well as well as the yester-years home buyers they bought at market prices, as with home buyers now, no thing stays still for too long in any format. Well if you can only afford to buy a home there & is looking -you got two choice go + buy or wait.With waiting your playing a 50/50 chance, that house price may go up to much for you to even get a mortgage at that time & given that you have to raise 25% of the sum to get some mortgages you'll be hard pressed.

It's been the same for years even decades, everyone agrees that we need more housing, but once it's on someone doorstep - they don't want it any where near them full stop, key to getting any new development is to
rip the boundary's of the class system (wealth) up in the area. Yet these same people moan about lack of services in area at the same time, where a few extra houses would make business sense to start to run services after people have moved in. It comes down to access, road network & area of land taken up for the development on paper.

tonlight

---------- Post added at 18:13 ---------- Previous post was at 18:02 ----------

Isn't the borrowing all the money we did in the first place (labour) did the most damage, after all labour did have highest number of public sector jobs on record by borrowing to pay these same striking persons?
Yes I know borrowing has to done, but not at Labours levels, then spend more again for the rest to keep it a float. All the borrowed money comes at price, it has to be paid back at % interest over the sum borrowed hence inflation rate :dozey: Anyhow who came in to power after labours time would have to make deep cuts to pay back the money that the past government paid out to keep the UK's economy afloat, after the stock market dip.

As they say "what goes up, has to come down" so we are in a come down period from a all time high borrowing spree - loans have to paid back. Book/spending has to be balanced or less than your paying back to your creditors, just think of it like a personal loan. (it's near the same thing but much larger)

toonlight

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

Oh no argument just thought I'd mention we weren't debt free. Yes we are coming back from an all time high borrowing spree - both publically and privately.

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

No argument from me here too Ignitionnet, good buddy :D Your point is well taken, I stand corrected. We are all human after all :drunk::Peaceman::waving::handshake Quicker we get our spending under control better we will be long term. The unnecessary spending needs to stop, red tape slashed & throw out anything "PC" in all walks of life.

toonlight

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

I would just like to add that in my view there is the worst of the housing crash still to come as people mainly young first time buyers who maxed out their income and credit on a house that is way past their income level start having houses repossessed because they cannot sell at the price they need to clear debt/mortgage and downsize to a more affordable home

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

I have never heard so much crap in all my life, When l was out of work two years ago, I was sent for interviews at jobs that pay £16.000 grand per year and there were some 40 people for the interview for one job.

There is no work out there for a decent hard working person that pays well, all this crap from the government that there is work, is talking out of there hat.

The unemployed are just a number to the job centre, there are people out there that have been made redundant, that are now regarded as too old for a job.

Unemployed HAS GONE UP since the coalition stepped, WHY, they work for the sectors that have stripped there staff, due to budget cuts.

I work for a company and have been told, in a few months l too can be made redundant. Why don't people get real, The whole damn country is in a downhill spiral, you don't know if you have a job, or even a public service.

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

I would agree with that :sleep:

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

a) Labour were in power two years ago, Arthur - not even you can hold the Tories responsible for that
b) I think we know if we have a job or not, don't you?

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

And who was in charge 2 years ago Arthur?

You really are in denial...

(And I don't mean that watery thing that flows into the Mediterranean)

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

Coalition came into power in May of last year Arthur.

Not the fault of government and not entirely under their control. We're not a communist state where the economy is entirely under government control.

Incidentally I get paid reasonably well and work hard and would like to think I'm decent. If you want to blame anyone for low wages I'm afraid it's globalisation, Labour's immigration policy and the baby boomer generation - which you're a part of. The immigration was actually to try and offset the bulge in the baby boomers as they need people to pay their pensions, however it does mean increased supply of labour so lower salaries. Unfortunately in lower skilled jobs the pressure and competition is strong.

If you took no opportunity to increase your skills this is entirely your own doing, no-one is entitled to a well paid job, if you had no opportunity I am extremely sorry to hear that but I don't know why you think you should be paid more than others by default. You may work hard but so do many other people - up to you to show what you can do that means you should get more money.

I would hope that isn't the case but no doubt some element of the unemployed being a number is true.

Something to do with a recession. Recessions mean job losses, this one has actually been relatively light on the job losses due to high public sector employment.

Employment rates go up and down Arthur, would have thought you'd have been alive long enough to know that, full employment is a socialist fantasy. Japan tried to keep employment high, their economy is a mess.

Very few people can be guaranteed a job. You are completely exaggerating about public services. Go complain to your council about those, they're the ones cutting front line services while keeping their highly paid co-ordinator and consultant positions going.

Labour tried to give everyone a job in public service.

That worked.

Communist North Korea and China are to the east and a touch to the south. Seems they would suit your expectations of a job for life and cradle to grave entitlement better.

---------- Post added at 20:07 ---------- Previous post was at 20:06 ----------

Thanks for that Hugh. I did wonder why I spent 11 hours today without a break stuck on my computer taking high level support escalations and working through faults.

---------- Post added at 20:13 ---------- Previous post was at 20:07 ----------

You could be right but they didn't have much choice.

The real pain is that this housing will likely be sucked up by BtL investors.

Facts for the day - a higher % of people between 50 and 65 own a second home than people under 35 who own at all.
Owner-occupation is dropping due to inability of people who actually want a home to live in to buy one.

I had a nice leaflet through the door for a Borough Council pleasing low-rise apartment building as they have banned anything over 3 floors - 2 beds start at only £349,995. Nice easy starter home that.

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

To a certain extent that is correct with the price of a house ,but they didn't have spend every available penny on expensive renovations i.e conservatories or have 2 holidays abroad or buying 2 expensive cars every three years all of which was mostly on credit that was unsustainable if one of the wage earners lost a job or had to take a fall in wages

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

Roflmao, so Arthurgray says he's never heard so much crap in all his life. Perhaps he should try 'listening' to most of the garbage he 'speaks'. That way he might actually have some concept of what's trash and what isn't. I'm beginning to wonder if our old mate 'Arthur' isn't really Derek Draper or Damian McBride.... :D

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

Indeed. People want high income. They also want low costs. They also want full employment. Guess what? You can't have all three.

Companies need to make money, so if they are to pay UK wages, they may need to increase their prices. As soon as they do this, people start crying "rip off britain" and moaning about the high prices. So, the other option for the companies is to go abroad for their employees.

Of course, companies themselves are also to blame. They will go for whatever option keeps their costs low, while maximising profits.

Put simply, if we want well paid jobs, and full employment, we are going to need to pay increased prices for our products and services.

That's another thing that needs to drop. House prices. We all need somewhere to live, and for a lot of people, their mortgage repayments are a major part of their salary, and one that they will be paying for up to 25 years.

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

Good luck with that. Developers have to get God, Allah, Vishnu, Buddha, the Prophet Mohammed and their great-great-great-great-grand mother to sign in blood in triplicate to be allowed to build, and even then the usual suspects, 50-something home-owning NIMBYs, pop up to have a good whine.

Current complaint source here is http://trag-sos.moonfruit.com/# - you see what I mean about the demographic in the protest photos.

Streetview here.

Re: Cameron and Clegg worse than Thatcher.
 

You won't be saying that when you're 50 something and your home is your pension... ;)