Kier Starmer stepping down
- Thread starter HFE Signs
- Start date
You already shared a partial source for the dual budgets
And plenty of other sources you wanted for where keynesian economics worked and explanations and applications of keynesian economics too alongside explanations in real terms too.
Upvote
0
In my post #105 I asked about failed investment and suggested it was due to dividend payments. You answered that it was the fault of planning and NIMBYism. I asked whether you agreed that the companies had been loaded with debt and had paid huge dividend (#108). You failed to answer on more than one occasion. You then carried out your usual tactic of accusing the other poster of changing the subject and failing to answer. I understand that is known as gaslighting.
Upvote
0
Ok, so no source and you'd like me to do your research for you?You already shared a partial source for the dual budgets
And plenty of other sources you wanted for where keynesian economics worked and explanations and applications of keynesian economics too alongside explanations in real terms too.
Hopefully you'll read up on Keynes at some point, so you know what he actually stood for.
Upvote
0
Please quote your post number replying to my question, which was, in case you have forgotten, "Do you mean that the water companies have not been loaded with debt an have not made huge dividend payments to shareholders?" post #108
Upvote
0
As a moderator, you are surely aware that all quotes are linked back to the original post?
110, 113, 116 - if you having difficulty with the links.
Upvote
0
People dont like being challenged on their believes, especially when they are ill thought out ideas that the have not researched and dont stand up to scrutiny,
Also anonymous ids make some people into keyboard warriors.
Upvote
0
“But look,” the Rabbi’s wife remonstrated, “When one party to the dispute presented their case to you, you said ‘you are quite right’ and then when the other party presented their case you again said ‘you are quite right’, surely they cannot both be right?” To which the Rabbi answered, “My dear, you are quite right!”
Upvote
0
The increase in Employers' NIC was a disgrace and should be reversed ASAP. It's a tax on jobs which has had a detrimental effect on sectors like retail and hospitality. Labour said they wouldn’t increase Income Tax, VAT or National Insurance – then back-pedalled and said they really meant NIC for “working people”. What they don’t realise (because none of them has ever run a business) is that if money has to be found to pay Employers’ NIC, there’s less money for things like pay rises and bonuses, so “working people” end up suffering anyway.
Ending Section 21 evictions is going to be a real headache for landlords and will push more and more of them into short-term AirBnB type rentals and will make it harder for renters in the long term.
The new PM (whoever he may be – but I think we already know) should press ahead with reforms to business rates to help protect high streets and pubs.
Upvote
0
They've backed themselves into a corner. Taxes need to go up. End of story.
When I was starting out in my first job in the 80s I and many others thought it was great that the basic rate came down from 30 to 25% after a few years. Now it's only 20%.
We didn't think about what would happen to dental and eye care costs and prescriptions, etc.
Taxes need to go up.
When I was starting out in my first job in the 80s I and many others thought it was great that the basic rate came down from 30 to 25% after a few years. Now it's only 20%.
We didn't think about what would happen to dental and eye care costs and prescriptions, etc.
Taxes need to go up.
Upvote
0
That's not the only reason it will be harder for tenants. Referencing will be stricter and rent guarantee insurance will be harder to get for some tenants.
Previously section 21 was the simple way to evict tenants who were only paying occasionally, were disruptive to neighbours or caused damage. Now the real reason needs to be used. This will make it more difficult for problem tenants to find a new place to live and will also cause issues if they try to go to social housing.
On top of that if a landlord has used non payment as the reason then they will also go for re[payment of the outstanding rent which will usually result in a CCJ against the tenant.
Upvote
0
The minimum energy efficiency standard will make poor people homeless.
How many people who live in their own house are perfectly content without having to install a heat recovery system for shower mixer taps, solar water heating, having £3,500 external doors fitted, solar panels fitted, £10,000 double glazing installed, a wind turbine installed, etc.
It's going to be nigh on impossible/impractical to get some properties to a C EPC, without spending thousands of pounds on them.
What happens when you do spend thousands on them - the rent goes up - the poorer people can no longer afford the rent.
If I live in an E rated property that's my choice, renters wont have that choice.
How many people who live in their own house are perfectly content without having to install a heat recovery system for shower mixer taps, solar water heating, having £3,500 external doors fitted, solar panels fitted, £10,000 double glazing installed, a wind turbine installed, etc.
It's going to be nigh on impossible/impractical to get some properties to a C EPC, without spending thousands of pounds on them.
What happens when you do spend thousands on them - the rent goes up - the poorer people can no longer afford the rent.
If I live in an E rated property that's my choice, renters wont have that choice.
Upvote
0
We have had a survey and we can’t get to a C no matter how much money you throw at it.
This law if it ever gets passed is going to mean thousands of rental properties ending up on the market with nobody wanting to or able to buy them.
Upvote
0
It's coming in, but has been put back to 2030 and the amount you have to spend on improvements before trying to get an exemption rises from £3500 to £10,000
Reasonably well off home owners will be happily living in D E F rated properties
The poorest renter will be living in C rated properties.
A poor person won't be able to rent a nice (but not efficient) property in a nice area, so will probably end up in one bedroom flat (but energy efficient) in a nasty area.
I know what I would prefer if I was a renter
Upvote
0
It is probably a slightly different issue, but those properties still exist and are still available to be sold or to be rented out. I doubt many would buy in order to let out as AirBnB, there isn't the year round income. So those housing units are still available to those who need housing. Unlike the huge number of houses owned by foreign owners solely as investments.
Upvote
0
2 of my clients are selling off their rental properties, my only other rental clients only have 1 or 2 properties so are hanging on to them for now, they may be looking at this again if the Government bring in National Insurance on the rental income.
The problem is that if these properties are sold to people to live in and not rent out then it means there are even less properties on the rental market.
Upvote
0
I wouldn’t know the figures but I would imagine there are a large amount of people renting because they are not in a position to be able to purchase a property.
Upvote
0
Interesting a quick Google suggests the following:
The actual number was a big fat ZERO in the nine years he was in power. You have to laugh.
In answer to the comment above about the renters having the opportunity to buy. As with my own renter, they both have very good jobs, one being self-employed, either not got a good credit record or no funds for a deposit, and could not get a mortgage. Not saying this is always the case but if you can "afford" to rent for many thousands a month there's going to be a bloody good reason why they cant buy.
And I would think there are many "trapped" in this scenario. it was a shame as they were very good tenants and sadly they found a very fast diminishing pool of houses to choose from. Fortunately they found something no where near as nice and no where near the schools the kids go too.
- Private Rented Sector: Research by mortgage lender Pepper Money estimated that 220,000 fewer homes are available to rent as landlords leave the buy-to-let market, driven by changing legislation and taxation.
- Social Rented Homes: In its first full year in office, government figures revealed a net loss of 3,834 social rented homes in England, a figure that more than doubled from the previous year
The actual number was a big fat ZERO in the nine years he was in power. You have to laugh.
In answer to the comment above about the renters having the opportunity to buy. As with my own renter, they both have very good jobs, one being self-employed, either not got a good credit record or no funds for a deposit, and could not get a mortgage. Not saying this is always the case but if you can "afford" to rent for many thousands a month there's going to be a bloody good reason why they cant buy.
And I would think there are many "trapped" in this scenario. it was a shame as they were very good tenants and sadly they found a very fast diminishing pool of houses to choose from. Fortunately they found something no where near as nice and no where near the schools the kids go too.
Upvote
0
I know what you are saying and it makes perfect sense, but every property a landlord sells that has not been purchased by someone previously renting means another property removed from the rental sector, so unless there are some incentives to being a landlord this trend will continue meaning less and less properties available to rent.
Upvote
0
Where I live there is a huge transient population which means lots and lots of rental properties in often quite old buildings.. Landlords are selling up because of the legislation changes and even more will sell up rather than pay for insulation. This means there will be fewer properties for rent pushing the price up for renters. They don't want to buy as they don't plan to live here for long.
Our tenant can't get a mortgage so is only able to rent. Like many landlords we will be selling up as we can't meet (or afford) the new energy efficiency rules. We only have the property because we brought the freehold. We don't rent out properties as a business, in fact the money we get just about covers all the bills.
Upvote
0
Their old property might be sold into the rental sector.
If they were first time buyers then the number of potential occupiers is reduced.
The rental pool decreases but so does the number of potential occupiers.
Property is not created or destroyed depending on who buys our sells it.
Ultimate the market will decide, whether prices or rents fall to the point where people can afford them or the economy booms, or ...
Upvote
0
These could be properties that the poorest could afford to rent , but it will be people a couple of steps up the ladder that will be buying them.
The people who could previously afford to live in them, will no longer be able to.
Like I said in my previous post, it's the poorest who will be hit hardest, end up homeless or living in more energy efficient properties but in far worse locations and probably far smaller properties.
Upvote
0
Surprisingly in Shetland which has the shortest summer season in the UK there are complaints that far too many properties have been turned into Air B&Bs, making it almost impossible to get a long term rental.
Upvote
0
I've been renting a property out unlawfully for a few years, risking a criminal record and a large fine.
Not through choice and not to benefit me.
Primarily because I was doing someone a favour and didn't want to make a them homeless.
I was charging him probably half the market rate (even for the condition the property was in), but the property isn't energy efficient, it was getting more and more untidy and the recent changes meant I had to do some upgrades.
He was more than happy paying what he was paying to live there, I was reasonably OK with it, but would be far better off if he left.
Problem was, I no longer felt comfortable taking the risks, he can't afford to pay any more, even though I am spending £10k+ on improvements.
In the end we came to a mutual agreement and I paid him to give up the tenancy.
He's currently living with his brother, had he not had a brother I don't know where he would be.
I'm upgrading the property now, will never be able to get it to an EPC C (It's a detached Cotswold stone cottage) so we will either move back in to it, use as a holiday home or sell it.
If I do sell it, chances are someone will buy it as a 2nd home or uses as a holiday home.
A property someone was perfectly happy to rent is no longer available for rent.
Not through choice and not to benefit me.
Primarily because I was doing someone a favour and didn't want to make a them homeless.
I was charging him probably half the market rate (even for the condition the property was in), but the property isn't energy efficient, it was getting more and more untidy and the recent changes meant I had to do some upgrades.
He was more than happy paying what he was paying to live there, I was reasonably OK with it, but would be far better off if he left.
Problem was, I no longer felt comfortable taking the risks, he can't afford to pay any more, even though I am spending £10k+ on improvements.
In the end we came to a mutual agreement and I paid him to give up the tenancy.
He's currently living with his brother, had he not had a brother I don't know where he would be.
I'm upgrading the property now, will never be able to get it to an EPC C (It's a detached Cotswold stone cottage) so we will either move back in to it, use as a holiday home or sell it.
If I do sell it, chances are someone will buy it as a 2nd home or uses as a holiday home.
A property someone was perfectly happy to rent is no longer available for rent.
Upvote
0
I really hoped that KS would become a great PM - but in the end I don't really underatnd what he stood for.
It is such a cliche that forever we say "the country is in a right mess" and I don't really believe all of that, but we need to have a serious discussion about decisions that are made by governments and by ourselves in our communities. Forget about the endless debate benefit spending, but as a country we waste so much money - but somehow we NEVER discuss it?
Money could be better spent in the NHS, unused medication is binned instead of recycled, we have money being spent on statues, pointless 'look good' painting and decorations, hundreds of vehicles that aren't used and a load more. We need to tell people they need to get better at doing things too, if you are overweight, then you need to be told to start making changes yourself instead of just giving treatment all the time that's related to weight.
civil servants are paid too highly but we never talk about that either........... a quick saving could be made there.........
police are wasting money on investigating pointless crimes and often being used a a taxi service.....
councils are throwing money up a wall on most things to suit what their budget should be spent on, here in manchester theyve just done a litter campaign costing hundreds of thousands, absolutely pointless.
money needs to be spent better - across the board and I genuinelu think we could see huge savings if people looked into it.
It is such a cliche that forever we say "the country is in a right mess" and I don't really believe all of that, but we need to have a serious discussion about decisions that are made by governments and by ourselves in our communities. Forget about the endless debate benefit spending, but as a country we waste so much money - but somehow we NEVER discuss it?
Money could be better spent in the NHS, unused medication is binned instead of recycled, we have money being spent on statues, pointless 'look good' painting and decorations, hundreds of vehicles that aren't used and a load more. We need to tell people they need to get better at doing things too, if you are overweight, then you need to be told to start making changes yourself instead of just giving treatment all the time that's related to weight.
civil servants are paid too highly but we never talk about that either........... a quick saving could be made there.........
police are wasting money on investigating pointless crimes and often being used a a taxi service.....
councils are throwing money up a wall on most things to suit what their budget should be spent on, here in manchester theyve just done a litter campaign costing hundreds of thousands, absolutely pointless.
money needs to be spent better - across the board and I genuinelu think we could see huge savings if people looked into it.
Upvote
0
There are too many pies and too many fingers in those pies.
Every time any government, council, public body, etc. sets up funding for a scheme, there are people queuing up to get access to that funding for their own benefit.
The same with charities, thousands of charities raising funds which primarily go to the people who set up the charities.
Upvote
0
Latest Articles
-
What Carphone Warehouse, Microsoft and Uber Have in Common: They Started in a DownturnThere's a comforting myth that you need a booming economy to start...- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
What Makes a Small Business Actually Sellable?There's a question that a lot of small business owners never think to...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
Why Your Team Keeps Asking the Same Questions (And What to Actually Do About It)Every small business owner knows the moment. You're halfway through...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
At What Point Do Courier Losses Just Become a Cost of Doing Business?If you sell physical products online, you already know the feeling. You...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
What I Wish I'd Known Before Using AI in My BusinessSomewhere between the headlines promising AI will transform everything...
- Ozzy
- Updated: