Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2017 16:49:57 GMT
I saw a couple on telly once who had a 100 house buy to let empire in wales and used the profits to build and fund schools in poor areas around the world. Not everyone is a twat. "Buy to let" is wrong. I don't care if people do charity shit with their profits (I hate charity anyway). I hate houses and flats. I have never owned property never will and don't want to but "Buy to Let" is a damaging influence on society. Buy to Let landlords are parasites. /rant mode OFF/ and.... Relax Not all are parasites thankyou.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2017 16:55:47 GMT
"Buy to let" is wrong. I don't care if people do charity shit with their profits (I hate charity anyway). I hate houses and flats. I have never owned property never will and don't want to but "Buy to Let" is a damaging influence on society. Buy to Let landlords are parasites. /rant mode OFF/ and.... Relax Not all are parasites thankyou. We'll have to agree to disagree on that
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Jun 20, 2017 17:06:22 GMT
I saw a couple on telly once who had a 100 house buy to let empire in wales and used the profits to build and fund schools in poor areas around the world. Not everyone is a twat. "Buy to let" is wrong. I don't care if people do charity shit with their profits (I hate charity anyway). I hate houses and flats. I have never owned property never will and don't want to but "Buy to Let" is a damaging influence on society. "Buy to Let" landlords are parasites. /rant mode OFF/ and.... Relax Typo edit Fair enough. I think you're right on all counts philosophically, but like it or not buy to let exists and for me, at least someone somewhere is trying to harness it and use it for good as they see it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2017 17:35:49 GMT
I think you are confusing the humanitarian work John was (and presumably still is) doing with helping and assisting with the illegal activities that some of these folk were up to. Now as far as I am aware John has done nothing of the sort so before you start throwing libellous comments around I would belt up. Unless of course you do have some evidence he has been aiding and abetting illegal stuff in which case you should take it to the respective authorities, I bet you haven't though but rather just wanted to make some snide comment. Edit - a quick Google located him and his charity here. www.refugeesupport.eu/about/Although I consider bodger to be a complete prick, it was more than a little evident that he was simply expressing some humour. You should recieve an oscar though for your reply. Excellent amateur dramatics 😊 I disagree, it was a snide comment, one I believe he also said on cwdf. (Though I could be incorrect on that). Humour is normally annotated with a corresponding smiley, this wasn't so I stand by my initial comment, and I'm sure he can stand up for himself but then you never miss an opportunity do you Steve? So all rather as expected really.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2017 17:40:56 GMT
Not all are parasites thankyou. We'll have to agree to disagree on that Well you are incorrect. My daughter rents from a buy to let landlord who is very responsible, responsive to problems with the property and perfectly reasonable in her dealings with her.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2017 17:44:34 GMT
Although I consider bodger to be a complete prick, it was more than a little evident that he was simply expressing some humour. You should recieve an oscar though for your reply. Excellent amateur dramatics 😊 I disagree, it was a snide comment, one I believe he also said on cwdf. (Though I could be incorrect on that). Humour is normally annotated with a corresponding smiley, this wasn't so I stand by my initial comment, and I'm sure he can stand up for himself but then you never miss an opportunity do you Steve? So all rather as expected really. I sometimes express humour, but being a little dry, I don't tend to use the smileys. (I have however been trying lately to remember to use them). I actually used a smiley with my reply to you, showing humour. You've totally fuckin ignored it !!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2017 17:47:13 GMT
I disagree, it was a snide comment, one I believe he also said on cwdf. (Though I could be incorrect on that). Humour is normally annotated with a corresponding smiley, this wasn't so I stand by my initial comment, and I'm sure he can stand up for himself but then you never miss an opportunity do you Steve? So all rather as expected really. I sometimes express humour, but being a little dry, I don't tend to use the smileys. (I have however been trying lately to remember to use them). I actually used a smiley with my reply to you, showing humour. You've totally fuckin ignored it !!! No I didn't hence I made no comment about the last line of your post, which I took the smiley to relate to. I was merely disagreeing with your initial point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2017 17:57:48 GMT
mjg
Are you here merely to disagree with everyone?
Anyway going back to the BTL situation. I don't know if your daughter is on housing benefit (none of my business) but if she isn't, and is working in order to pay rent, then logically it would make sense that a natural housing market without BTL parasites would work in her favour.
I mean A market where the only buyers are people looking for a home and actually wanting somewhere to stay where they don't get cold and wet and die in the winter. If you introduce BTL into the equation you get a situation where people who already have somewhere to stay so they don't get cold and wet and die in the winter buy houses and force the price up. this is fundamentally wrong to me. I know its related to the ridiculous right to buy crap but that was also wrong.
Its not like you can choose not to have somewhere to stay where you don't get cold and wet and die in the winter. You don't have to have a car or a telly or a vacuum cleaner. You need food shelter and water.
Ok so boats are an option but not very accessible and a lot of people would not want to live on boats anyway.
BTL is wrong. I will not change my view on that.
So there
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jun 20, 2017 18:19:07 GMT
BTL will abate to a large degree when interest rates normailse, firstly because it will easier to earn a return on savings by putting them on deposit and secondly because this will put downward pressure on property values. I have no vested interest either way, but agree that owner-occupation is a better social model than BTL.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2017 18:26:24 GMT
mjg Are you here merely to disagree with everyone? Anyway going back to the BTL situation. I don't know if your daughter is on housing benefit (none of my business) but if she isn't, and is working in order to pay rent, then logically it would make sense that a natural housing market without BTL parasites would work in her favour. No I'm not here to disagree with everyone, if you were more careful to read my posts you will see I actually agreed with Jenlyn earlier, and indeed others who I have disagreed with on other occasions. As for the second point no she doesn't claim housing benefit FWIW. She rents because she currently can't afford to buya house of the type she wants to live in in the area she wants to reside. This should change next year when my son in law fully qualifies as a teacher, then they will be able to buy rather than rent, until the BTL has helped them considerably.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jun 20, 2017 18:32:17 GMT
I saw a couple on telly once who had a 100 house buy to let empire in wales and used the profits to build and fund schools in poor areas around the world. Not everyone is a twat. "Buy to let" is wrong. I don't care if people do charity shit with their profits (I hate charity anyway). I hate houses and flats. I have never owned property never will and don't want to but "Buy to Let" is a damaging influence on society. "Buy to Let" landlords are parasites. /rant mode OFF/ and.... Relax Typo edit So you you don't want to ever own property and you don't want "buy to let" landlords' properties. So where would you like to live (apart from on a boat)? Council house? Sorry, all sold off by Maggie. Housing association? Well ok, if you are lucky. It seems to me your phobia against landlords is irrational (but then I suppose phobias, pretty much by definition, are irrational.) when i I first moved to Aberdeen in 1980, I didn't want to buy, I rented (privately). Then I went to the Far East for a year. Then I came back and rented again before buying my first house in 1988. When I retired I spent some pension fund on a flat. An Italian doctor rented it for a year, then he got another job in London. Then an oil company chap rented it. Now a foreign mature student is in it. None of these people wanted to buy a home as they were only here temporarily. Without the private rental market (of which buy-to-let is a major part) these people wouldn't have anywhere to live. So your view seems foolish and selfish.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2017 19:00:57 GMT
Fair enough if that's what you think I'm always happy for other people to have their views. Its interesting that you should mention my views are selfish. You may well be right about that.
I still disagree with buying a property specifically to make profit by letting it.
These short term visitors you speak of. Why do they have a right to live there at the "going rate" ie the same rate a family would have to pay simply to have somewhere to stay so they don't get wet when it rains? Maybe they are charged more and push even more people out of property ownership
A lot of people have never experienced what it is like to have nowhere to live comfortably.
Anyway who cares its a market economy lets just get on with it. Profit is good.
As I say I really don't give a shit personally as I have a massive bank balance and a few kilos of gold (not on the boat) and a nice steady income from my MI6 consultant work.
So its okay.
Typo
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Jun 20, 2017 19:16:09 GMT
Fair enough if that's what you think I'm always happy for other people to have their views. Its interesting that you should mention my views are selfish. You may well be right about that. I still disagree with buying a property specifically to make profit by letting it. These short term visitors you speak of. Why do they have a right to live here at the "going rate" ie the same rate a family would have to pay simply to have somewhere to stay so they don't get wet when it rains? A lot of people have never experienced what it is like to have nowhere to live comfortably. Anyway who cares its a market economy lets just get on with it. Profit is good. It's the banks that have gummed up the property market. One of my sons and his girlfriend rent. They have 3 years of never being late with the rent behind them. The mortgage they'd need to buy would cost them about 2/3 of the rent but lenders say no. Banks now want capital behind loans, eg parents underwriting it. They are very twitchy for some reason and I don't accept that buying crap loans abroad and loosing their money has any relation to mortgage lending here. Sorry, quoted a random post to get your attention.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Jun 20, 2017 19:22:27 GMT
Fair enough if that's what you think I'm always happy for other people to have their views. Its interesting that you should mention my views are selfish. You may well be right about that. I still disagree with buying a property specifically to make profit by letting it. These short term visitors you speak of. Why do they have a right to live here at the "going rate" ie the same rate a family would have to pay simply to have somewhere to stay so they don't get wet when it rains? A lot of people have never experienced what it is like to have nowhere to live comfortably. Anyway who cares its a market economy lets just get on with it. Profit is good. It's the banks that have gummed up the property market. One of my sons and his girlfriend rent. They have 3 years of never being late with the rent behind them. The mortgage they'd need to buy would cost them about 2/3 of the rent but lenders say no. Banks now want capital behind loans, eg parents underwriting it. That will be because banks aren't expecting interest rates to stay where they are for the 25 year life of the loan, and they want large deposits because they want somebody else to take the hit on the negative equity which will occur when interest rates do rise.
|
|
|
Post by Delta9 on Jun 20, 2017 19:22:39 GMT
Fair enough if that's what you think I'm always happy for other people to have their views. Its interesting that you should mention my views are selfish. You may well be right about that. I still disagree with buying a property specifically to make profit by letting it. These short term visitors you speak of. Why do they have a right to live here at the "going rate" ie the same rate a family would have to pay simply to have somewhere to stay so they don't get wet when it rains? A lot of people have never experienced what it is like to have nowhere to live comfortably. Anyway who cares its a market economy lets just get on with it. Profit is good. It's the banks that have gummed up the property market. One of my sons and his girlfriend rent. They have 3 years of never being late with the rent behind them. The mortgage they'd need to buy would cost them about 2/3 of the rent but lenders say no. Banks now want capital behind loans, eg parents underwriting it. They are very twitchy for some reason and I don't accept that buying crap loans abroad and loosing their money has any relation to mortgage lending here. Sorry, quoted a random post to get your attention. The banks are clever enough to know that the constant rate of increase in property values is completely unsustainable and the market is in a huge bubble which is on the verge of popping.
|
|