The election 2015

Build to let is an element . You will take that out and thus the supply will go down . It's quite simple

i am am not referring to commercial in any shape or form here. My examples were residential

fact is that developers or simple converters will never ever want the civil service telling them what to charge. The contempt for that sector is absolute (rightly so) and it's not so much the finance as the very fact that the decision is taken away. That's a complete anaethma for developers at all levels. They have no problem if their decision rebounds but so long as it is theirs and not Diane fcking flabbot or some other politcian with an agenda against landlords

ultimately all property is entirely a free market. There will be bubbles and troughs but as has been said here over and over the market always corrects . It just does
rent control is meddling and will always slow down supply. That is a certainty
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
i havent read it all but am certainly not buying into rent controls

Why does the left always believe it knows what is best for everyone? as with the lunatic suggestion for civil servants to set house price sales

The germany comparison is frankly weird and very tenuous. its entirely wrong to assume that all extra disposable income gets spent on imported goods.
Click to expand...

I'm open minded on rent controls, but wasn't necessarily advocating them. My preference is for new build and use supply to regulate price bubbles by meeting demand. I am however a bit skeptical about warnings that the world will fall down if some kind of regulator sets a ceiling price. The same people who told us this will happen are probably the same people who suggested that the national minimum wage would lead to a million people becoming unemployed. The notion of telling businesses how much they have to pay staff is much more radical concept than a domestic rent threshold. Since then of course, the conservatives have adopted the support of the NMW as a plank of their policy. I'm equally conscious (though cynical as regards what teeth they bear) than a great many industries are subject to a price regulator, albeit I conceed that a number of companies have pulled out of building the next generation of nuclear power stations, albeit this is because they're not being offered enough subsidy to do so! Free markets aren't always as free as they appear. Price controls exist in the higher education sector too and yet university applications continue to rise

The German model is possibly worth looking at later. What would the UK consumer do with extra money in their pocket? We don't know of course, but we can take a few educated guesses and a lot of it will be driven by age cohorts and how much extra. The Germans can more safely rely on their population to buy German products because they're high quality and it makes strategic sense. You could of course try and argue that because we manufacture a lot of crap, we're better of requiring our population to hand their disposable income over to finance companies and defend our jobs through this industry! - probably for another day
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
i am am not referring to commercial in any shape or form here. My examples were residential
Click to expand...

Cumbria's a big place Clive taking in a vast stretch of possibilities from run down areas of Workington right up to speculative second homes or holiday lets on the shores of lake Windermere. The introduction of external money hasn't always been welcomed in these areas of course as it's helped drive a property escalator which excludes locals (usually young people) and forces them to move away.

I tend to think new build can be treated differently however, as the bigger culprit tends to be rennovations of lower medium stock into luxury which is then taken up by some Manchester based professional who turns up at weekends. Devon is another county that suffers from this, and the Yorkshire Dales are coming under pressure now
 
Regulator sets a ceiling price in what? Sale prices?

Are re you kidding? We've destroyed that lunatic idea. What do we want to hire loads of civil service tossers to stick their nose in the property market for?

does it really take much understanding that if my property is on sale for 500k and I ahve five firm buyers I a, going to find another way to differentiate ? And so will everyone else?

compating with the minimum wage is nonsense . That is not a cap.

will the fat useless lazy civil servant cnt guarantee my price if the market goes down then?
 
Last edited:
A sale price and a rental price are two separate things

The pressure is in the rental sector, and a generation are getting trapped in the residential market. This is bound to manifest itself elsewhere in the economy negatively eventually. It already is doing. Indeed, KPMG are red flagging it. The symptoms are demoralised workers leading to low productivity and loss of competitiveness and an ever increasing burden on the taxpayer as the government subsidises private landlords through the backdoor using the tax and benefits system

The answer is clear as day to me

BUILD MORE

Subsidise building if necessary, not collection and payment
 
Last edited:
lets put this simply

fat civil servant values my house at 500

i have five buyers

so what do I do?

easy. Who's goung to pay the most for the coffee table? 50k ? That will do

and it was exactly the same with controlled rents and the black market in "key money" . So no they are not different things. You try price controls in any market and you have major issues. Venezuela anyone?

i think the biggest hurdle is planning restrictions and that is what needs to be looked at
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
will the fat useless lazy civil servant cnt
Click to expand...

are they all like that Clive?..or are we doing a bit of stereotyping there?

its good job all the slim... useful ...hard working types ..are in the private sector...we know its all safe from failing then:)
 
Last edited:
There is that argument that the government has not approved enough house building so as to keep the market high. I'm sceptical to be frank . I just think it's lazy thinking with no foresight although in fairness the magnet that the uk has become could not have been expected. The growth in londons population has been massive

and also parents do worry about their kids not getting in the ladder. Having your son sitting around at home at 45 is surely no fun as he leaves his skid marked pants on the bathroom floor, picks his nose over breakfast and noisily bangs his obese bird in the next room every night
 
you got a "fat/obese" theme running through the posts tonight Clive

do you want to talk about it?:)

I remember the "comedy" show..it wasn't funny ...called "Sorry" from the 70's with Ronnie Corbet playing a 40 year old living with Mum..it was seen as worth a show due to the unusualness of a 40 year old living with Mum. Thats one show they couldn't make now..its not unusual any more..most Chelsea fans do:)
 
I worked with a woman who had her four sons living at home . All over 30. This was about 20 years ago

this is all true. She came in the office one day and said her youngest has just bought a flat in Brighton...

said he goes there every weekend and she couldn't work out why because he's never had a girlfriend...
 
The old I worked with a woman line again Clive

Are you quite sure there isn't something you want to share with us? At the weekend my name is Clivetta

Actually, what might be more interesting is what you said to her? I take it you handled it with complete tact and sensitivity?
 
Last edited:
knowing Clive..i would imagine it went something like.."I'll bet he's dickie back riding a lazy fat civil servant in that flat"

so no issue with the tact and sensitivity:)
 
Warbler said:
The old I worked with a woman line again Clive

Are you quite sure there isn't something you want to share with us? At the weekend my name is Clivetta

Actually, what might be more interesting is what you said to her? I take it you handled it with complete tact and sensitivity?
Click to expand...

what?

she was lovely old dear and although half the office heard what she said no one dared upset her with the rather obvious
 
Personally, I'd have struggled to keep a straight face, but it all depends on who the person is I suppose
 
Why are houses generally an appreciating asset? Wouldn't it be healthier for society, i.e. wouldn't we all be better off, if they merely held their value, in real terms?
Click to expand...

I come back to this question, because it hasn't been dealt with. All Grasshopper and clivex have come up with by way of an answer is that imposing price controls would be a disaster becasue fat people would be in charge. But that's answering a question that wasn't asked. I never suggested the price of houses should be capped, you won't find any such statement in anything I've said.

Let's try putting it another way. Why do you think it would be a good thing for houses to continue indefinitely appreciating in value, and how fast a rate of appreciation would you suppose is sustainable? Might there, even conceivably, come a point in your eyes when prices were too high?

 
Last edited:
You dont understand markets at all do you. If they were "too high" then there would not be buyers and the prices would drop. As they have done before

there ia only so much credit and cash that a buyer can find ffs
 
Corbyn set to win first time round

Look at his links with sizer. What a mess labour is. A leader who endorses conspiracy theories surrounding jews
 
clivex said:
You dont understand markets at all do you. If they were "too high" then there would not be buyers and the prices would drop. As they have done before

there ia only so much credit and cash that a buyer can find ffs
Click to expand...

You're the one who doesn't get that markets don't operate without knock-on effects elsewhere.

In Dublin property values reached a point where hotels, factories, petrol stations and the like were closing because the sites were more valuable for apartments. Jobs and economic infrastructure were being lost. Do you suppose that was a good thing, and do you think the Irish government were right not to intervene?
 
The authorties already intervenw through planning permissions. If dublin couldnt manage that then thats their problem

I emphatically so not believe that there should be any price control. Also if you understood markets which you clearly do not, restrictions on development push up prices not the other way round
 
clivex said:
Corbyn set to win first time round

Look at his links with sizer. What a mess labour is. A leader who endorses conspiracy theories surrounding jews
Click to expand...

I think the problem you might have with that Clive is..no one really cares about this sort of story imo...and we have a good measure of whether this latest story does matter to people..lets see if if his price drifts on Betfair..if enough people are outraged then his price today will go out..he is currently available to back at 1.58. I'm just passing an opinion on what i think people generally bother about..i'm passing no personal opinion by the way

If this is such a negative for him it should clearly affect his chance of winning..and therefore price. Lets see if people are bothered about this sort of stuff..i'm not convinced..but will happily concede i'm wrong if his price drifts today
 
Last edited:
I'm talking about the general electorate ec. No the entryist dominated labour party which is a tiny number of people

For instance a pm who observed a minutes silence for ira members and even this weekend refused to condemn ira bombings. Presumably that includes Birmingham?

you think the electorate would vote for a leader who endorses the blowing up of innocent Britons?

i think the times leader today sums it up perfectly. This is a big event and almost certainly the end of the Labour Party as credible opposition. That's fine for the tories and quite probably the liberals who could conceivably become the natural party of opposition in the near future. There is a glaring gap now for the huge number of voters that believe Venezuelan economics as well as fawning over Islamic terrorists as well as the ira is lunacy but do not want the tories to have untrammelled control

it doesn't take much imagination to work out that a potential revival of clause 4 with clear epintent to enact will rightly drive out countless businesses from uk jurisdiction and almost certainly halt investment. Corbyn has such idealogical contempt for those that work in the private sector that the huge loss of jobs that will entail will be of no concern to him.

my belief if that if he is elected the party will split very quickly and the remaining hard left rump will lose even more seats and end up somewhere between the greens and ukip
 
Last edited:
to be honest Clive..i think if that story bothered people enough..he wouldn't even get the leader job.

Oh no Clive..don't think that i think he will ever win an election..crikey..never entered me head. Tories are in for the long haul now..particularly if ..as i think will happen..the Labour party does a gang of however many.. if he gets it. He could end up leading a very small labour party..with the majority of Labour under a completely new banner.

There is clearly something big going to happen here isn't there re Labour?...this leadership election is going to be looked back on as a major change i think. Its starting to remind me of a soap opera turned nightmare for Labour. First they get a disastrous election result..then they want.."some time" ..to look at themselves..take time to choose a new leader..find out what the public wants..then..up steps Corbyn and makes the election defeat look trivial at the side of what is ahead of them now with JC as the leader..i like his initials as well..a certain irony..he might just end up with 12 followers
 
Last edited:
I agree with that.

I actually do do believe that as when the Palestinians were given just about everything they demanded at Oslo but worked away, certain factions actually don't want power. They prefer the victim hood and supposed moral high ground of protest and mugs cannot read into that that this is imply because they know that in heart of hearts they are frankly useless nutters
 
Back
Top