StraferJack

"But you're still the man that didn't "get" Liverpool mad Annasfield's name, and that is still funny" yup

am I the last person to realise Alan Medic is an anagram?

At least that BK employee was on minimum wage I argue with Louisa all the time even tho she is totally in the wrong - for free!

"Who are these people exactly and how did they become part of the discussion? " well in THIS instance it;s the OP "we're looking to get on the ladder but also make a good investment in an area which is likely to appreciate" but I don't think they are in any way unique in thinking this way

"If we (the state and/or private developers) did (and had) built more homes then prices and rent wouldn't be as bad." I've said it a million times - even if enough (define?) houses were sudden;y built tomorrow, the outcome would be unacceptable to current homeowners. For prices to lower enough to meet yer average wage earner, current property would have to fall massively in value. There would be outcry or maaybe there wouldn't - maybe people saying "just build more - problem solved!" would be happy for the 1 million they spent to suddenly be worth 300k because if you build several hundred thousand houses and prices just plateau for a couple of years that doesn't help the problem

if people are moving AND looking to see their property rise in price then you can't just blame "property investors". They are a problem too, but so are homeowners who want (then depend on) property price rises I'm not trying to have a go at the OP by the way - my first response was one of "good luck" but as the thread developed it was a useful example of what's wrong with the way people think of property. Profit motive should drive work and innovation - it shouldn't be linked with where you live. Prices are rising not just because houses aren't being built - they are rising because owners insist they do

"As an aside I think you're both naive and a bit simplistic to think that the profit motive is some how intrinsically wrong..... which isn't to say I don't think the London housing market ain't broke by the way " there does come a point when the two competing viewpoints snap tho? Most people seem to think the London housing market is broke - but when it comes to nailing down exactly why, people seem to get squeamish and blame concepts like "supply and demand" rather than the reality that the profit motive, in this market, is eating itself? Am i sneering at people who want property prices to rise? I wouldn't say sneering but I will consistently point out it is the problem

"do I just detect some sneery hypocracy....do what I say not what I do type stuff maybe" is this still out there as an accusation?

"m seeing an obvious third option - move to an area which is a bit down-at-heel but with signs it is on the up, and you believe will turn out to be a nice place to live." More option 2.5 but yeah nothing wrong with that - and if that happens then the probability is that house prices will rise. But if you are moving there with a view to hoping the prices rise as a significant factor then I can't see that as anything other than drawing bridges up behind you

not at all thought I was specific - if you move to a new area and you want prices to rise - that's the problem if you want to move to an area because it's nice enough and you can afford it - no problem there

Jeremy. As I say absolutely nothing wrong with people moving anywhere. But the dynamic of wanting prices to rise (or looking after yourself in long run or whatever phrase we use ) is the key reason more houses aren't being built. People keep saying "supply and demand. Build houses and the prices will come down". But too many people do not want prices to come down

Quids you are detecting nothing but windmills - you are in contrary form lately even by your standards Nowhere am I giving out about people moving. Absolutely nowhere What I do have s problem with is people wanting property prices to rise when they move there

It's all in the original posters'a comments isn't it People don't just move to an area they can afford - they move and actively want prices to continue to go up after they move thus preventing others from doing what they did

Because people "bump" their thread up all the time by just posting "bump"

??? Last post on this thread before yours today was June 2014

You resurrected an ancient thread for that? And do you mean this James, still posting? http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/search.php?5,search=James,page=1,match_type=AUTHOR,match_dates=0,match_forum=ALL

That was one of the loudest games I've heard at Lewes since I've been here - really good atmosphere from what I could make out

I doubt all of the employees lack common sense - far more likely they have been explicitly forbidden from using any discretion by (cash strapped) management surely?

oops - apols

that's my journey home banjaxed then

Girl are you a Wes Anderson film cuz you look absolutely stunning but I don't see this going anywhere

"No-one is discouraging anyone. They're just taking the piss, it's not malicious, and it's all part of the fun." Bantz!!

"but honestly Rye Lane is not involved in the dropping off /picking up scenario ." Thought I had agreed with that? What I went on to say as that the smaller roads which will take the extra traffic will be affected. Also, the dropoff/pickup point will generate enough traffic to indirectly affect Rye Lane . But I agree - RL isn't the primary focal point

Very good

anyone down in Sussex for the Lewes game tonight?