StraferJack

It's going tobe Van Gaal isn't it He's told spurs he won't be going to WHL

The too regular was meant to refer to me not you

"where" - yep that's a good one too Loz I dunno - whichever way you look at it it's problematic instinct says build houses - but is that much different to saying "people are poor, print money"? I still think the underlying, real problem is systemic - people with property want and need property prices to be high. Building more - even if I agree with the logic in quids post - will I expect lead to just more expensive property

i have little interest in taxing property but if we imagine a scenario where "all"* of the homes which supposedly need building are built - who sells them and how much would they be? I'm not as convinced we have a shortage of property and we need to BUILD a lot more homes as much as I am that property is too expensive. (as I've said before the demand for higher prices isn't just volume driven) Building a lot of new homes, even discounted to 70% current market is not enough help to enough people I think there is a lot of housing vacant which, if property were cheaper or not seen by the owner as an investment, would be released back on to the market * the number can be whatever any given reader thinks would work

The second is why, after a series of friendly and extremely helpful PRIVATE message exchanges with SJack, I was then contacted by Mr X the Administrator, rather cooler in tone I have to say - and have since discovered that these messages have gone onto this 'public' thread, as above. why do you think I have anything to do with admin? Why are two different people responding in different ways a "mystery"? i was PMing friendly advice as another (too) regular poster Admin is Admin as for blue brick thread - I have zero idea... I can't see it anywhere.

Didn't we hear the same arguments before minimum wage was introduced?

Otta, I'm as confused as you by what's going on here I wasn't engaging with the angrier posters. I just saw your post and wondered "is that true?" So I had a quick google and thought that was interesting. Wasn't mean to be any more than that

But why are you screaming all this stuff at me?? I haven't suggested or called you anything of the sort. I don't think anyone has tbh

What are you on about quids? I post a graph just to give some background to otta saying london has never been this full Which seems fair enough And you barge in with "but one we can't mention in your world SJ? it's a non mentionable??? For fear we are nazis?? or is it a lie?" I literally have no idea where you are coming from today

But as of now it's not more populous than 70 ish years ago

Otta You sure london has never been so populated? http://blogs.ft.com/ftdata/2013/07/17/london-population-set-to-break-historic-record-high/

Not really no

It's just become unpleasant now.

Nothing contradictory about my first two statements. Slippage is just that. Not a state of emergency Looting refers to the situation overall rather than the individual level Again it's about balance. The balance has massively tipped towards the already owners who are leveraging the massive annual unearned income to purchase the other properties Generations are being left behind. And you can't see it Undergraduate nonsense? Matter of opinion Definitely not complacent tho

"What annotys me are just the general assumptions - renting of the state is great in terms of product and services (cloud cukoo) " That is hugely and wilfully misrepresenting what most people are saying There is nothing objectively wrong with owning more than one property. What people are mostly picking up on is that the balance has become way off beam compared with history

Did someone just suggest that the sort of actions taken by British governments throughout the 20th century (post war housing programme for example) is somehow comparable to the extreme States of China and Korea? I think someone just did

We will know in about 2 or 3 years if this is a new Liverpool era or a one off season

If people didn't think it was an investment they wouldn't be in such a rush to buy The rush stems from the belief that prices will only go up They want some of that (sometimes expressed as "if we didn't now"..) Plus everyone tells tenants constantly that they are wasting money

That is true mick but it's not the same as actually finding a manager Not many good ones around. Doesn't mean you shouldn't look obviously Plus, not to take anything away from Liverpool, but undoubtedly not being in CL has helped them

Tenant has repeatedly said they happy to pay for something. That's not scot free IMO, noone has suffered so why should anyone be expected to pay 750 quid? As stated, landlord isn't going to use that money to replace carpet.

anyone getting early hay fever particularly string this year? or am I just getting it worse as I get older?

if the tenant are already in and furnished, what's the problem at all? i could see how s tain might be unnatractive to would be renters, but that doesn't seem to be the case here Moment has passed. If these tenants are there for at least a year or two it'll be time to replace whole carpet anyway - asking for any money from previous tenant is just pure greed

also worth noting a bold opening statement "dulwich is crying out for.." and ending with "if you agree post below" so if only people who agreed did post then it would prove his case accountants, eh? tcha

can I agree with mike about (admittedly not everyone) treating their homes as investments but agree with you about they shouldn't be subject to CGT?

people who post nothing but a link, without any explanation worse again - people who start threads with nothing but a link without any explanation I'm looking at you fl0wer!