You can make one law . . . what would it be?

Bechet45 said:
joe mcclaine said:
zoch kosis revis hahin said:
I would ban sex. Make it completely illegal.
Click to expand...

You do know that's where babies (that's brand new humans, essential for the survival of the species) come from, don't you?
Click to expand...

But at the current rate, it will be the destruction of our species. Nowt wrong with that per se - t'ain't written that we have to be here.
Click to expand...

I'm all for the human race tearing itself apart.

In fact, I have a bald Cat lined up, and I'll sit there stroking it, laughing like a super-villain as the planet descends into oblivion.

As long as it's a Tuesday.

I don't have much on (in the figurative and very actual sense) on Tuesdays.
 
I don't think we do PM on a morning ... do we?

I love Mondays. I work in Service Delivery for IT in the NHS and Mondays are always ace! Folks have had all weekend to dream up all manner of silliness and often get an early start on a Monday, requesting daftness, implementing silliness and the lines go mental come 09:01. Love it! Mondays make everything worthwhile. Mind you, by Tuesday I just want to stab people in the head ... and get to do that in a defined and safe way where nobody dies and everything goes away having had a smashing time :D
 
joe mcclaine said:
Anyone thinking of investing in residential property to make money needs their bumps read.
Click to expand...

You know this from experience?

I know plenty of people who have made their fortune in residential property. Large portfolio's turning over figures that some people can only dream of whilst they never have to set foot in an office.

The return I have had from residential property in the last 3 years could not be matched by 95% of investments. Even in capital appreciation alone.

Of course, it is largely impacted on which area of the country you reside/invest in. However, large amounts of people in the south east have done extremely well.
 
Bechet45 said:
You can't have large amounts of people! You can have large amounts of money owned by large numbers of people. Less money. Fewer people. Arghhhhhhhh!
Click to expand...

I think you are missing the point? There is large amounts of money to be made in resi property.
 
Ben88 said:
Bechet45 said:
You can't have large amounts of people! You can have large amounts of money owned by large numbers of people. Less money. Fewer people. Arghhhhhhhh!
Click to expand...

I think you are missing the point? There is large amounts of money to be made in resi property.
Click to expand...

The point about GCSE English being a requirement is well made.
 
riskybadger said:
Jeltz said:
Make large corporates like Amazon, Google, Vodafone etc. pay tax on the money where it is earned not where they can funnel it away to be taxed at lower rates.
Click to expand...

wouldn't work because that isnt the main method of being tax efficient.
Click to expand...

The legislation already exists - what is required is a determination by the revenue to get tough and impose the legislation. You can't just transfer profits - it has to be done by the imposition of unfair pricing or non-existent management fees - if the revenue take a hard stance and adjust some of these as add backs - then tax on the adjusted profit - there should be no problem.
 
Bechet45 said:
You can't have large amounts of people! You can have large amounts of money owned by large numbers of people. Less money. Fewer people. Arghhhhhhhh!
Click to expand...

"Many people" would have been better than "large amounts of people", although there are times when that would be acceptable or even preferable for accuracy's sake.

Ben88 said:
joe mcclaine said:
Anyone thinking of investing in residential property to make money needs their bumps read.
Click to expand...

You know this from experience?

I know plenty of people who have made their fortune in residential property. Large portfolio's turning over figures that some people can only dream of whilst they never have to set foot in an office.

The return I have had from residential property in the last 3 years could not be matched by 95% of investments. Even in capital appreciation alone.

Of course, it is largely impacted on which area of the country you reside/invest in. However, large amounts of people in the south east have done extremely well.
Click to expand...

+1 especially if you bought a house in 2009 at the bottom of the market. At that time you get one round here for £50k and get £500 pcm in rent. That's a BIG return.

The scandal is that there's no publicly-owned social housing being built (the old "Council Houses"). Right-to-buy took reduced the stock and now only housing associations are providing any new ones. Classic short-termism plus an agenda that actually worked against the long-term interests of the working class at their short-term gain (a cheap house).

So now private landlords are raking-in public (benefit) money to pay their buy-to-let mortgages or even give them returns at 8, 9, 10% APR on their investment as well any uplift in the value of their capital (i.e. house price increases.)
 
The days of people making money on residential property are over. When my mum and dad bought their house in London in 1982 the cost was twice my dad's annual earnings as a electrician for BT. About £55,000 in today's money.

The price of the average house in south east england is about £275,000 now. The average wage is about £25,000. That's 11 times the average salary. Home ownership has gone from a sensible aspiration to a dangerous obsession in this country.

The pool of people that can afford a £55,000 deposit (£65,000 with fees and stamp duty) and a £225,000 mortgage (salary would need to be around £75,000 p.a. to afford that, three times the average salary to buy the average home) is dwindling fast.

Property ownership is a rich man's game once more. Take the SE (particularly London) out of the equation and house prices have hardly moved overall for 10 years now, a situation I see continuing for a while until wages catch up.

What I fear is a 1% rise in interest rates as that puts nearly £200 a MONTH on that £225,000 mortgage. I am lucky to own 2 properties (neither of which I live in, ironically!) but I wouldn't be going anywhere near residential property these days as a capital appreciating investment but there are good returns to be had in the lower end of the rental market outside of London.
 
We aren't building enough houses to cover the demand -- and the need for more houses is mostly driven by divorce (a family formerly in one house now need two) and net migration (hello EU immigrants!)

I also see a lot of middle-aged couples and even single older people in MASSIVE four or five bedroom houses. It was a family house, then the kids grew up and left -- they, the children and grandchildren, are now renting small flats or tiny houses. Should be the other way round. Crazy!

Also, the builders keep the number of new properties low to keep the price up - why build lots and depress the value? Supply-side economics at its worst.

Local govt should build a mix of "for sale" and "to let" properties, to ease the problem and generate income. It'd be a win/win policy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom