Oh Darling,

[gettin2dizzy]

ALISTAIR Darling is set to back a £100bn gamble with taxpayers' cash in a desperate bid to kick-start the struggling mortgage market.

The Chancellor's plan involves effectively underwriting the majority of new mortgages in the UK to encourage big investors to give badly needed money to lending banks.

The proposed scheme means the UK Government would guarantee mortgage bonds, where banks parcel up individual home loans and sell them to investment firms. When the system works properly, banks have a source of money to loan to customers and investors get a return.

Where have we heard that plan before ?! :rolleyes:

I'm now left in no doubt we have a bunch of idiots running the country. I'd hoped prices would fall far enough to allow us first time buyers to have even the smallest of chances to buy. What an ********.

[gettin2dizzy]

Why don't they just print some new money off completely....oh..no....that's what they're doing. Balls.

I better get that wheelbarrow out the garage, to start wheeling carts of useless cash around.

[embee]

Yep, we definitely have a "sub-prime minister".

The one that got me was the idea of "up to" £2.5k for employers to take on people who have been unemployed for at least 6 months. Note the "up to", as in £1.25 is "up to" £2.5k.

With that incentive (depending on how many strings are attached) what employer is going to take on any unskilled workers who've been unemployed less than 6 months. In other words, all the retail workers from Woolies etc won't stand a hope in hell of getting a similar job for at least 6 months. Bright lot aren't they?

[northwind]

It's a system that can work. It can also, of course, explode and torpedo the world banking system. I suppose all things considered it might be better not to try it again just now :D But since we're deep in a credit restricted period, some action to get mortgage and business lending moving would be good, I think that's hard to deny.

[Ed]

But northy, there are far more savers than borrowers, and also a lot of people live in rented accommodation - maybe because it's temporary, maybe because they can't afford to buy, maybe because they don't see a home as an investment - loads of reasons - so why should they, as taxpayers, underwrite other peoples' debt? Why are we creating a system by which we start it all over again, getting ready for potentially another huge loss? Why favour just mortgage holders?

G2D is right I think...

[BigFootIsBlurry]

We're all going to hell in a hand basket, I'm just trying to enjoy the ride before my job runs away and leaves me impoverished. There's not a lot I can do about it either way so why worry?

[Ed]

Big Foot me old cheese, you have a vote - use it. If everyone just wrung their hands and said 'ain't nothing I can do 'bout it' then nothing would ever change.

You can't build a different world with indifferent people.

...and on the mortgage thing, investment banks see a Government backed mortgage as a different species because it has a good credit rating, and so they start trading them, and fat cats get rich at everyone else's expense. And those that aren't Government backed don't get the same treatment, interest rate might be higher on them because the investment yield is less. Er... haven't we been here before?

[northwind]

But northy, there are far more savers than borrowers, and also a lot of people live in rented accommodation - maybe because it's temporary, maybe because they can't afford to buy, maybe because they don't see a home as an investment - loads of reasons - so why should they, as taxpayers, underwrite other peoples' debt? Why are we creating a system by which we start it all over again, getting ready for potentially another huge loss? Why favour just mortgage holders?

New householders buy new houses, which need built. They buy furniture, TVs, etc etc. Hire solicitors ;) Slowing down house purchasing impacts a lot of other industries.

But mainly, it's a good way for banks to borrow from each other- mortgages are basically a long-term asset, so you use them as security for lending, mortgage the mortgage essentially. It's only a problem when the value of the asset is overestimated. Which is what happened last time, and no doubt would happen again sooner or later.

It's neccesarily not a bad concept, it did work for years. They're not under-writing the mortgages as I understand it, they're underwriting the mortgage bonds. Remember that it's the total stop of inter-bank lending which really kicked things off here, this is potentially a way of securing the inter-bank lending and getting things going again. If it's done right it'd be a good use of money, because underwriting a loan is cheaper than lending the full sum.

(I don't personally think this is a good thing, but it's needed if we want to have a pre-recession economy model again. Personally I think we should be moving on, not rebuilding the failed system so that it can make a small minority richer then collapse again in 2030 and make everyone else poorer, but then I am a commie pinko liberal ;) I think instead of baling out a banking system that's reliant on inter-bank lending, we should have a crack at making one that isn't, so it can't just break in half one afternoon for no particular reason)

I'm not actually arguing in favour of this, just throwing out a counter-argument, I don't really have a good enough grasp of the actual economics to comment on whether it's a good idea. It did work for years but maybe that's just a long mean time to failure rather than a solid system at work.

[gettin2dizzy]

No. All it does it reduce the debt by way of mega inflation. It's just promoting more foolish borrowing, and postpone the inevitable housing correction.

Savers NEED to be rewarded, not penalised. The Sub Editor of the times announced last week that he thinks savers should be taxed so heavily that they are forced to spend their money. I've never heard anything so preposterous in all my life.

[Alpinestarhero]

I'm worried...is there any chance me and maria will be able to buy a house ever?!?!

:(

G2D - I agree. People who save lots generally save for a reason; retirment, to purchase a house, holidays, other stuff. Why penalise savers? Its our money, if we don't want to spend it then why should we be made to pay for it?

Tempting to just get the cash and stick it in a safe...the goverment can't do anything then

[SoulKiss]

In other words, all the retail workers from Woolies etc won't stand a hope in hell of getting a similar job for at least 6 months. Bright lot aren't they?

And whats the "waiting time" before you can start receiving Dole if you get made redundant?

[gettin2dizzy]

I'm worried...is there any chance me and maria will be able to buy a house ever?!?!

:(

G2D - I agree. People who save lots generally save for a reason; retirment, to purchase a house, holidays, other stuff. Why penalise savers? Its our money, if we don't want to spend it then why should we be made to pay for it?

Tempting to just get the cash and stick it in a safe...the goverment can't do anything then
Well there was a chance that you could have afforded a house if the correction was allowed. But with this in place, it's just going to keep prices inflated longer.

I wonder if it's something to do with the fact that MPs own quite so many homes ;)

[Grinch]

I'm worried...is there any chance me and maria will be able to buy a house ever?!?!

Nope, never... be like me Rent... why are we obsessed with mortgages in this country?

Infact rent is dropping as the interest rate has dropped, plus people can't sell there extra houses so they are trying to rent them out, so the market is getting busy... Its a great time for renting.

[SoulKiss]

Nope, never... be like me Rent... why are we obsessed with mortgages in this country?

Infact rent is dropping as the interest rate has dropped, plus people can't sell there extra houses so they are trying to rent them out, so the market is getting busy... Its a great time for renting.

Because Iron Maggie told us we should be.

[Mr Speirs]

A*Hero - something I am looking into http://www.homebuy.co.uk/ (http://www.homebuy.co.uk/)

Give me a PM if you want a really simple summary of all that Jargon. It may well help you and maria buy a house.

[Ed]

Tempting to just get the cash and stick it in a safe...the goverment can't do anything then

Oh yes they can. By printing more, they can make it worthless:(

[Alpinestarhero]

Oh yes they can. By printing more, they can make it worthless:(

oh yea

so what can we do?

i know! buy property

oh, wait...

[Ed]

oh yea

so what can we do?

i know! buy property

oh, wait...

Spend the bloody lot:D If you have no pension, well just claim pension credit and every other benefit you can think of:D - funded by the mugs who are paying tax on renting out their investment properties!

[Jabba]

It's all just numbers and slight of hand....... but, as I see it, the main problem is cash-flow around the economy.

I feel sorry for the banks.....on one hand the govt is telling them to act prudently so they decide to deleverage and control their exposure to potentially bad debt. On the other hand the govt is telling them to lend money at pre-crunch levels. What are they supposed to do?

In middle of this mess are ordinary folks like us.

Part of the real problem is the debt that this stupid govt are saddling us and our kids with. Why didn't they stock-up the coffers when times were good? Prudent my **** :smt072

[SoulKiss]

A*Hero - something I am looking into http://www.homebuy.co.uk/ (http://www.homebuy.co.uk/)

Give me a PM if you want a really simple summary of all that Jargon. It may well help you and maria buy a house.

AVOID !!!!!!!

Shared ownership is just a way for developers to screw homebuyers harder.

If people can only afford to pay 50% of the going rate, then the price is 100% too high.

The only winners are the developer.

Think about it.

Based on people being able to afford £100,000

Old Model

Spend £50,000 building a house, sell it, make £50,000 profit.

New Model

Spend £50,000 building a house, sell 50% of it, make £150,000 profit

Very simplified I know, but.......

House prices are too high, there is no need for the "House Price Recovery" that everyone is waiting for, those who bought into the market in the last 5 years or so, need to take the hit and write it up to experience/their own greed/stupidity at falling for the "own a home at any cost" and the "the value of your home is cash in your pocket" attitudes.

These schemes are addressing the symptoms of the swelling of house prices, without dealing with the actual cause (and I used those words deliberatly, as it WILL be painful for some)

We are in the state we are in at the moment due to the 80's policies.

1st it was that everyone should be a home owner

2nd it was the "you can have kids AND have a career

These led to an obsession with home ownership, a raping of the social housing stocks with "the right to buy", which now means we have to pay private landlord prices to house those that have gone to the state because they need a roof over their heads.

The current problems we are seeing are a result of parents having less time to spend socialising their children and teaching them how to behave.

The other offshoot of the "2 income family" is that it means that prices can go up, after all if the average household income is up by 50% then thats 50% more that the household can spend on things like mortgages etc, hence the inflation of house prices, utility bills etc.

I apologise if the above is a bit disjointed, I have had to leave and come back to this post a few time.

I am also talking in VERY general terms and basing everything on a 2 workingparent family situation, obviously things are very different for other situations.

[vixis]

Its all David Bowie's fault apparently....

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/jan/14/david-bowie-music-industry

[Mr Speirs]

[quote=SoulKiss;1744709][quote]

I agree with you about Shared ownership offered by developers it is an absolute con.

But there is scheme on the website called 'My Choice Home Buy' which is different to the new build home buy. Its a shared equity scheme rather than shared ownership. The company I may be using to do this are a non-profit organisation.

[SoulKiss]

[quote=SoulKiss;1744709][quote]

I agree with you about Shared ownership offered by developers it is an absolute con.

But there is scheme on the website called 'My Choice Home Buy' which is different to the new build home buy. Its a shared equity scheme rather than shared ownership. The company I may be using to do this are a non-profit organisation.

TBH I didnt go beyond the 1st page of the link you posted - didn't have time - and you just saved me that :P

The thing is its STILL a bad idea as all it does is help people buy over-valued properties.

NOT buying is hard, but its the only way that prices will come down to the reasonable prices they should be - which should be LESS than 3x the average annual wage as the average house price - possibly adjusted for region.

[Grinch]

I keep seeing empty houses on my travels... I wonder if I can lay claim to them.

[SoulKiss]

I keep seeing empty houses on my travels... I wonder if I can lay claim to them.

Nope - tho its something that SHOULD be the case.

Look at the A406 North Circ - TfL own most of the empty/derelict houseing stock - bought as they came up for sale to allow for the road to be widened - then abandon them, instead of doing them up and making an income off them/keeping them from going to ruin

Stupid really.

[Mr Speirs]

[quote=Mr Speirs;1744728][quote=SoulKiss;1744709]

TBH I didnt go beyond the 1st page of the link you posted - didn't have time - and you just saved me that :P

The thing is its STILL a bad idea as all it does is help people buy over-valued properties.

NOT buying is hard, but its the only way that prices will come down to the reasonable prices they should be - which should be LESS than 3x the average annual wage as the average house price - possibly adjusted for region.

Yeah you are right properties are vastly overpriced and they do need to come down considerably which is something I have always maintained with my parents as they are convinced that buying was the best option.

My arguement is 10 years ago when my parents bought their house the set their budget at 100k which bought them a 4 bed detached home with garage.
Last year my sister and her fiance bought a 1 bed flat for £108k with a household income of half what my parents both earnt.
How is that possible? How with less than half the income was a 108k home in their budget??? A 40 year mortgage and my mum paying a quarter of the mortgage repayments!!

But this countrys economy is propped up by the over valuation of the housing market and unless industry and manufacturing reappears in the UK either houses are going to stay overpriced or country will collapse.

[SoulKiss]

[quote=SoulKiss;1744743][quote=Mr Speirs;1744728]

Yeah you are right properties are vastly overpriced and they do need to come down considerably which is something I have always maintained with my parents as they are convinced that buying was the best option.

My arguement is 10 years ago when my parents bought their house the set their budget at 100k which bought them a 4 bed detached home with garage.
Last year my sister and her fiance bought a 1 bed flat for £108k with a household income of half what my parents both earnt.
How is that possible? How with less than half the income was a 108k home in their budget??? A 40 year mortgage and my mum paying a quarter of the mortgage repayments!!

But this countrys economy is propped up by the over valuation of the housing market and unless industry and manufacturing reappears in the UK either houses are going to stay overpriced or country will collapse.

The situation IS unsustainable.

What I would like to see is the government bail out those who are in mortgage trouble due to GENIUNE mistake/bad luck.

Get the FSA to do an audit of mortgage applications and check the amounts put in by people as their earnings ARE real figures.

Where they self-certified and lied, well thats fraud and they are on their own to face whatever happens to them - probably not worth taking legal action, but just leaving them to deal with the fallout would do.

Get the average house price down to something sensible and get people understanding that your house's value is not part of your personal wealth and then you may get somewhere with getting things back on track

[Mr Speirs]

[quote=Mr Speirs;1744765][quote=SoulKiss;1744743]

The situation IS unsustainable.

What I would like to see is the government bail out those who are in mortgage trouble due to GENIUNE mistake/bad luck.

Get the FSA to do an audit of mortgage applications and check the amounts put in by people as their earnings ARE real figures.

Where they self-certified and lied, well thats fraud and they are on their own to face whatever happens to them - probably not worth taking legal action, but just leaving them to deal with the fallout would do.

Get the average house price down to something sensible and get people understanding that your house's value is not part of your personal wealth and then you may get somewhere with getting things back on track

Absolutely. I mean if I be more than happy for the housing market to return to normal working conditions but for that to happen the country is going to lose a vast percentage of its value making the £ almost worthless in the global economy. Saying that foreign investment in industry and manfacturing would increase and the value of the UK would be back where it would belong but sod me it would be a hard decade wouldn't it?

[Grinch]

Nope - tho its something that SHOULD be the case.

Look at the A406 North Circ - TfL own most of the empty/derelict houseing stock - bought as they came up for sale to allow for the road to be widened - then abandon them, instead of doing them up and making an income off them/keeping them from going to ruin

Stupid really.

Yep there are loads in Portsmouth that I see... and yet no real reason that I can see for them to be empty.

[jimmy__riddle]

IMO, if you think houses are overpriced and and the market is stupid then the answer is simple, dont buy!

If you want to pay X amount for a house and you can afford it then buy.

Quite simple really. Its not necessary to own a house.

people are always going to complain about the houseing market as a large amount of people are either winning or losing.

Anyway, by the time all these economic problems are sorted the worlds oil will be running out, then its back to the dark ages, almost literally.

[timwilky]

[quote=Mr Speirs;1744765][quote=SoulKiss;1744743]

The situation IS unsustainable.

What I would like to see is the government bail out those who are in mortgage trouble due to GENIUNE mistake/bad luck.

Get the FSA to do an audit of mortgage applications and check the amounts put in by people as their earnings ARE real figures.

Where they self-certified and lied, well thats fraud and they are on their own to face whatever happens to them - probably not worth taking legal action, but just leaving them to deal with the fallout would do.

Get the average house price down to something sensible and get people understanding that your house's value is not part of your personal wealth and then you may get somewhere with getting things back on track


Interesting, my son is in trouble, lost his job in October and has done a succession of jobs since just to pay his mortgage. He did not lie on his application. but his income is now less than half of what it was 3 months ago. He is now reduced to labouring on National Minimum Rate when he cannot get tiling jobs. Fortunately my brother gives him the labouring work and understands if another couple of days work comes up elsewhere he will be off.

The problem he is seeing, is that in common with himself every other tiler in the area is also now unemployed and scrambling round for bits of work, undercutting each other.

So if you look at his income now, he is earning less than half of what he claimed to. His girlfriend has left him as she will not live to his budget and taken her income steam with her etc.

At time he would be better off claiming benefits, but as he is only 21 he would get £41/week to live on. that is less than his gas/electricity/water/house insurance cost. He would have to wait 13 weeks before the system paid his mortgage interest. He has already told his mortgage company he may not be able to pay and they say that as soon as he defaults they will take steps to repossess as the house is already in negative equity etc.

People do need help. But lets help those who are prepared to help themselves. In order to work, my lad needs a van/insurance etc. I now have his van on my insurance with an any driver entitlement as that saved £80/month on what he was paying etc. But beyond that the only help he can get is for bank of mum/dad to pay his mortgage and deliver him food parcels.

[carty]

The current problems we are seeing are a result of parents having less time to spend socialising their children and teaching them how to behave.

Sorry to quote just this section of your reply, I may be taking it out of context, but what precisely, are the current problems, that you feel have occurred due to poor parenting?

The current problems we as a country face, appear to me to be the result of poor government policy and loose regulations that have allowed financial institutions to do what the hell they like for a long time. Are you saying this wouldn't have happened if families had sat round the dinner table and talked rather than letting the kids throw stones in the street?

Genuinely interested :)

Cheers,
Matt

[jimmy__riddle]

i assume he probably means the social problems with gangs, knife crime etc, not the economical ones

[SoulKiss]

Sorry to quote just this section of your reply, I may be taking it out of context, but what precisely, are the current problems, that you feel have occurred due to poor parenting?

The current problems we as a country face, appear to me to be the result of poor government policy and loose regulations that have allowed financial institutions to do what the hell they like for a long time. Are you saying this wouldn't have happened if families had sat round the dinner table and talked rather than letting the kids throw stones in the street?

Genuinely interested :)

Cheers,
Matt

To clarify - I was lumping in the whole summary of societies woes so including the "Feral Teenagers Stabbing each other" issue in with this as I was basing my responses to this thread from my initial stance of "its Maggie Thatchers" fault....

[Luckypants]

I was basing my responses to this thread from my initial stance of "its Maggie Thatchers" fault....

Maggie left office nearly 19 years ago! Get a Grip! The current party has been in government for almost 12 years, any blame for this mess should be laid squarely at their door. They have had ample time to correct 'market forces' and influence house buying policy, they have not.

If you want to name names, who has been at the centre of economic policy since 1997? Gordon Brown.

None of this finger pointing will help anyone suffering from the consequences of government policies. What we can do this year is use our vote to get shot of the current crop of incompetents. (Probably replaced with more incompetents, but it will be a different set!)

[dizzyblonde]

Sorry to quote just this section of your reply, I may be taking it out of context, but what precisely, are the current problems, that you feel have occurred due to poor parenting?



I'm thinking Soulkiss is meaning in the way of 'most' parents spend so much time working to keep the family going, that they spend very little time with their children thses days. I have been a single parent for 4 yrs, but not recently. I have managed to get work on the weekend that revolves around my son, so I am always there after school and can have a healthy balance. I am very luvky in that respect but I pay for it with the amount of nights I work to keep my house my own. I feel that a mums place is at home with the kids and should do part time work, but thats a little old fashioned these days as not many can afford to do that....
When parents think they are doing best by working all hours god send, put the kids in after school clubs and spend a small amount of time on weekends with their kids, on occasions that can be the worst thing that they can do as they turn them into monsters indirectly....who turn to drugs, get asbos and drink cider on street corners


but then again I may be wrong

[SoulKiss]

Maggie left office nearly 19 years ago! Get a Grip! The current party has been in government for almost 12 years, any blame for this mess should be laid squarely at their door. They have had ample time to correct 'market forces' and influence house buying policy, they have not.

If you want to name names, who has been at the centre of economic policy since 1997? Gordon Brown.

None of this finger pointing will help anyone suffering from the consequences of government policies. What we can do this year is use our vote to get shot of the current crop of incompetents. (Probably replaced with more incompetents, but it will be a different set!)

As a Scot. Maggie has a special place in my heart......

Having seen the BBC documentary that was shown on the 1st Jan I can see that some of my sentiment towards the old bag is perhaps a bit coloured.

But it was her governments plans that started the slide - BT now makes money, that could be going into the countries coffers, British Gas and the Electricity Board could be made to drop prices instead of the rampant profiteering that we have at the moment.

So yes, fair point LP, but I am looking at root cause, not the bumbling that came after....

[yorkie_chris]

I'm no economist, but they keep pouring cash "we" don't have into banking, to keep prices high, and keep the upper levels of banking people earning a fat wage. We're skint, spent up, they're rolling a snowball uphill and the hills getting steeper.
A cynical view would be that they know they are getting the boot next election... so if they make the situation REALLY unpleasant for the next lot, they stand a chance of getting back into power next time...

[Mr Speirs]

A cynical view would be that they know they are getting the boot next election... so if they make the situation REALLY unpleasant for the next lot, they stand a chance of getting back into power next time...

Hardly serving the people :)

[jimmy__riddle]

I'm no economist, but they keep pouring cash "we" don't have into banking, to keep prices high, and keep the upper levels of banking people earning a fat wage. We're skint, spent up, they're rolling a snowball uphill and the hills getting steeper.
A cynical view would be that they know they are getting the boot next election... so if they make the situation REALLY unpleasant for the next lot, they stand a chance of getting back into power next time...

+1

Although im very cynical as well!

[carty]

To clarify - I was lumping in the whole summary of societies woes so including the "Feral Teenagers Stabbing each other" issue in with this as I was basing my responses to this thread from my initial stance of "its Maggie Thatchers" fault....

Okey dokey, so you were off topic then? :mrgreen:

[Luckypants]

As a Scot. Maggie has a special place in my heart......

Having seen the BBC documentary that was shown on the 1st Jan I can see that some of my sentiment towards the old bag is perhaps a bit coloured.

But it was her governments plans that started the slide - BT now makes money, that could be going into the countries coffers, British Gas and the Electricity Board could be made to drop prices instead of the rampant profiteering that we have at the moment.

So yes, fair point LP, but I am looking at root cause, not the bumbling that came after....

Well you will get no argument from me over the sell off of council houses or the privatisation of essential utilities being wrong. But remember New Labour privatised the railways, which is just a crazy mess now. Both as bad as each other.

and yes, you probably do have a distorted view of Maggie, as do most from Scotland and South Yorkshire, Tyneside etc. Understandable but unfair.

[Grinch]

Maggie left office nearly 19 years ago! Get a Grip!

Sounds like a Torry to me... ;)

[Mr Speirs]

*Luckypants pulls up in his Land Rover wearing a tweed jacket and a shotgun*

What?? Me??

[carty]

and yes, you probably do have a distorted view of Maggie, as do most from Scotland and South Yorkshire, Tyneside etc. Understandable but unfair.

I don't understand - I got the impression Scotland got loads of money from English taxpayers so they got free prescriptions and stuff whilst we have to pay for ours? How could they possibly resent that?

I'm sure someone'll correct me if I'm wrong! [-o<

[yorkie_chris]

You mock, and yet labour has done so much damage. Who do you lot support?

[carty]

Who do you lot support?

Wolves. And myself :p

[Mr Speirs]

Monster Raving Looney Party for me. Lemonade in taps??? Yes please.

[Luckypants]

Sounds like a Torry to me... ;)

I don't consider that term an insult and think those that do are trapped in the party politics that have been killing our country for the past 60 years. It's a bit like calling someone who believes in socialist policies a communist... :D

*Luckypants pulls up in his Land Rover wearing a tweed jacket and a shotgun*

What?? Me??

Land-rovers are over priced rubbish. I cannot afford a Landy and do not like guns....

[Mr Speirs]

LOONY IDEAS HIJACKED & INTRODUCED BY SERIOUS POLITICIANS

Reducing the voting age from 21 to 18 years old. (Introduced by Harold Wilson)
Abolition of the dog licence. (Another stolen Sutch idea)
Legalisation of commercial radio stations. (Introduced by Ted Heath)
Pedestrianising Carnaby Street to make it safer. (Loony campaign issue in the 1970 General Election)
All day opening of pubs. (Taken by Margaret Thatcher)
Abolition of the 11+ examinations. (Introduced by a Labour government)
Passports for Pets. (Introduced by a Labour government in recent years)
Ramps on buses to facilitate access for the elderly & disabled. (We now see kneeling buses frequently in service in the UK)
Putting parliament on wheels and traveling around the UK to give everyone a go rather than being centralised in London. (Sounds a little bit like devolution and regional assemblies doesn't it?)
Honouring 'The Beatles' with knighthoods. (Just another loony idea which wasn't quite so loony in the end)
Heated bus shelters (Some councils have started to introduce this loony idea)
.....AND THOSE STILL UNDER CONSIDERATION BUT PRESENTED AS IDEAS FROM PLAGIARISING SERIOUS PARTIES
Reducing the voting age from 18 to 16 years old (Hijacked as a campaign issue by the Liberal Democrats)

[Mr Speirs]

Land-rovers are over priced rubbish. I cannot afford a Landy and do not like guns....

Your are okay with Tweed Jackets tho??? :)

[lily]

It seems in my family me and drew are the only ones who are winning.

We don't have many savings, we rent a place (which we have given notice on as have found a place that is bigger for less rent and other reasons) And we are looking to buy, which we think we will do as soon as the downturns stops (which it will)

If i look at this compaire to my parents:

Who are in the final years of paying off the mortage (think they have 7 years left) lucky with when the brought etc etc and the lack of mortage they needed from house price increase's in the past. But they can't move and downsize ready for retirement until the house price's pick back up as part of that is their pension fund. They also have savings which there financial advised told them to put in low risk stocks total lost 10K until the same advisor told them to move it out and back into the savings and ISA's they had before! Which haven't got a great interest rate due to the Bank of Englands Cut

Now if you look at my sister & brother in law:

Half way though a purchase of a new house from Barratts! Barratts have offered them part exchange on their current house of 116k (but placed it on the market at 109k). However at the moment they are in limbo..... due to the fact of when the mortage companies valuer went to view the new house, he has valued it at 10k less than what they have agreed to purchase the new house at (been 10 weeks since agreed) So current they are seeing who jumps first. Barratts can drop the price by 10k so they can buy it, or they can find the extra money from somewhere?!?!?
They are currently waiting for Barratts to come back to them as they have sold nothing at this site for 10 weeks now as my sister's 'new' place was the last thing to be sold. O they are also in debt by a huge amount on CC yet are prepared to take on more by a mortage!!!

[carty]

LOONY IDEAS HIJACKED & INTRODUCED BY SERIOUS POLITICIANS



I don't see a lot wrong with most of those? :confused:

[carty]

Barratts can drop the price by 10k so they can buy it, or they can find the extra money from somewhere?!?!?

Get Barratts to drop the price. They would have to find the 10k cash as the mortgage company wouldn't lend it to them would they?

[lily]

Get Barratts to drop the price. They would have to find the 10k cash as the mortgage company wouldn't lend it to them would they?

The area manager wants to drop the price as does his manager..... but the chairman won't..... however everybody else is still pushing for the price drop.

I can't believe a company as big as Barratts have to take something like that to the Chairman?! :confused:

[Grinch]

I'm a dirty Commie me.

[Mr Speirs]

I don't see a lot wrong with most of those? :confused:

No thats the thing. The Monster Raving Loony Party did actually have some good ideas but back in the 70's they were considered daft. Like the disbaled access on buses one.

[Mr Speirs]

It seems in my family me and drew are the only ones who are winning.

We don't have many savings, we rent a place (which we have given notice on as have found a place that is bigger for less rent and other reasons) And we are looking to buy, which we think we will do as soon as the downturns stops (which it will)

If i look at this compaire to my parents:

Who are in the final years of paying off the mortage (think they have 7 years left) lucky with when the brought etc etc and the lack of mortage they needed from house price increase's in the past. But they can't move and downsize ready for retirement until the house price's pick back up as part of that is their pension fund. They also have savings which there financial advised told them to put in low risk stocks total lost 10K until the same advisor told them to move it out and back into the savings and ISA's they had before! Which haven't got a great interest rate due to the Bank of Englands Cut

Now if you look at my sister & brother in law:

Half way though a purchase of a new house from Barratts! Barratts have offered them part exchange on their current house of 116k (but placed it on the market at 109k). However at the moment they are in limbo..... due to the fact of when the mortage companies valuer went to view the new house, he has valued it at 10k less than what they have agreed to purchase the new house at (been 10 weeks since agreed) So current they are seeing who jumps first. Barratts can drop the price by 10k so they can buy it, or they can find the extra money from somewhere?!?!?
They are currently waiting for Barratts to come back to them as they have sold nothing at this site for 10 weeks now as my sister's 'new' place was the last thing to be sold. O they are also in debt by a huge amount on CC yet are prepared to take on more by a mortage!!!

I am in a similar situation as you guys. We are also looking to buy at some point. We are starting to look for a nice wee cottage with space for my bikes to rent until the time is right to buy.

[carty]

No thats the thing. The Monster Raving Loony Party did actually have some good ideas but back in the 70's they were considered daft. Like the disbaled access on buses one.

I can't see why it was thought daft to have disabled access to buses? :confused: We're off topic now though! This is supposed to be about Labour policies in this decade!

[Biker Biggles]

Well you will get no argument from me over the sell off of council houses or the privatisation of essential utilities being wrong. But remember New Labour privatised the railways, which is just a crazy mess now. Both as bad as each other.

and yes, you probably do have a distorted view of Maggie, as do most from Scotland and South Yorkshire, Tyneside etc. Understandable but unfair.

Ahem point of order.
Railways were privatised by the Torys I seem to recall.Labour regigged it with the set up of Railtrack following the Hatfield crash debacle.

[SoulKiss]

*Luckypants pulls up in his Land Rover wearing a tweed jacket and a shotgun*

What?? Me??

Well he DOES have a Viffer.................

[SoulKiss]

I don't understand - I got the impression Scotland got loads of money from English taxpayers so they got free prescriptions and stuff whilst we have to pay for ours? How could they possibly resent that?

I'm sure someone'll correct me if I'm wrong! [-o<

You're wrong.

The Scots just decided to spend some of the money they were given in that way.

They probably had to sacrifice something else for that - but as I understand it they dont get any specific cash for Free Prescriptions

I believe the Welsh are the same.

Take it up with YOUR MP not the Scots people

[Luckypants]

Ahem point of order.
Railways were privatised by the Torys I seem to recall.Labour regigged it with the set up of Railtrack following the Hatfield crash debacle.

As I recall, the plans were laid by the Conservative party but followed through by New Labour. The new Labour administration could have decided not to do this.


EDIT: A quick Google shows that my rose coloured specs were wrong and indeed it was the Conservatives. Labour ruled out re-nationalisation on grounds of cost.

[Sosha]

Labour seems to have modified privatisation to "Privitatise the proffitable bits - then throw subsidies at the rest of it".

Perfect.

[gettin2dizzy]

It seems in my family me and drew are the only ones who are winning.

We don't have many savings, we rent a place (which we have given notice on as have found a place that is bigger for less rent and other reasons) And we are looking to buy, which we think we will do as soon as the downturns stops (which it will)


I am in a similar situation as you guys. We are also looking to buy at some point. We are starting to look for a nice wee cottage with space for my bikes to rent until the time is right to buy.


Will you be prepared to buy if prices level off again?

This underwriting is a diversionary tactic to try and keep house prices up; but they're just not sustainable. The correction HAS to come. You'd almost think they were protecting their own interests ;)

This is just a stupid idea. The reason house aren't selling is because of the uncertainty of both job and housing markets, mixed with the fact the people won't drop the price of their house asking prices. It is not because the banks aren't lending. If you have a 10% deposit, and a half decent credit record you will get a mortgage still, no problem.

[gettin2dizzy]

As I recall, the plans were laid by the Conservative party but followed through by New Labour. The new Labour administration could have decided not to do this.


EDIT: A quick Google shows that my rose coloured specs were wrong and indeed it was the Conservatives. Labour ruled out re-nationalisation on grounds of cost.
I think arguing over the tories or Labour is somewhat worthless.

They're both useless.


Chaining your bike to a 4 foot bollard... Are you kidding me?!

[yorkie_chris]

I like the phrase "all pigs eating out of the same trough"

The only way to get a reliable government would be to elect people who don't want the job.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

you can have kids AND have a career.

So essentially what you're saying is that women should know their place and get back to the kitchen. That wouldn't have gone down very well then let alone now, so it's hardly Maggies fault for choosing not to commit political suicide.

But it was her governments plans that started the slide - BT now makes money, that could be going into the countries coffers, British Gas and the Electricity Board could be made to drop prices instead of the rampant profiteering that we have at the moment.

Haha. Yes, nationalisation's the answer. After all, British Rail was a paradigm of good value and efficiency before it was privatised. :rolleyes:

[Frank]

I am one of those idiots that did without for yrs.I have saved and saved for a "rainy day" ,to find that now it is here my savings are all going down the pan.
Could I get help if I needed it.Probably not ,and why?
Because I've too many savings

[gettin2dizzy]

I am one of those idiots that did without for yrs.I have saved and saved for a "rainy day" ,to find that now it is here my savings are all going down the pan.
Could I get help if I needed it.Probably not ,and why?
Because I've too many savings
Pop your cash in an egg account. 4% up to £1m. If you've got less than £2k in the bank, whack it in an Abbey National saver account (6.5%).

I wouldn't bother putting anything in to ISAs at the mo, but equally I wouldn't take anything out of one as interest rates have to go back up.

Check this out for bonkers views on savers : Punish savers and make them spend money | Anatole Kaletsky - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/anatole_kaletsky/article5469589.ece)

[northwind]

No. All it does it reduce the debt by way of mega inflation. It's just promoting more foolish borrowing, and postpone the inevitable housing correction.

Savers NEED to be rewarded, not penalised.

Right, what has this got to do with savers?

Second, it seems you've misunderstood what they're suggesting here- they're NOT underwriting individual mortgages at all as you seem to think, they're underwriting mortgage bonds, which is a way of securing bank-level lending, not private lending.

[yorkie_chris]

Right, what has this got to do with savers?

The whole government institution of "share everything out" ... oh then years later when someone's saved it, someone else has pi$$ed it against the wall ... share it out again!

Kinda off topic but gids post reminded me of that.

[BigFootIsBlurry]

Big Foot me old cheese, you have a vote - use it. If everyone just wrung their hands and said 'ain't nothing I can do 'bout it' then nothing would ever change.

You can't build a different world with indifferent people.

...

I do use my vote (if voting lib dem counts that is), I'm firmly of the opinion that if you dont vote you shouldnt comment. What I meant was that actually right here and now on a day to day basis I cant make the economy better so I'm not going to spend all day counting my money and worrying about interest rates.

[gettin2dizzy]

Right, what has this got to do with savers?

Second, it seems you've misunderstood what they're suggesting here- they're NOT underwriting individual mortgages at all as you seem to think, they're underwriting mortgage bonds, which is a way of securing bank-level lending, not private lending.
It's pouring none existent money in at tax payers risk. Can you really see any benefit to this?!

[SoulKiss]

So essentially what you're saying is that women should know their place and get back to the kitchen. That wouldn't have gone down very well then let alone now, so it's hardly Maggies fault for choosing not to commit political suicide.

Did I say that? Looks more like thats YOUR interpretation.

I dont care which parent (if there are 2) that stays home.

[gettin2dizzy]

I dont care which parent (if there are 2) that stays home.
Bleh. Lesbians...

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Did I say that? Looks more like thats YOUR interpretation.

I dont care which parent (if there are 2) that stays home.

You didn't need to, that's what you've strongly implied whether you meant to or not. Otherwise you're expecting significant numbers of men to give up their careers instead which is even more unlikely, so my point stands.

[SoulKiss]

You didn't need to, that's what you've strongly implied whether you meant to or not. Otherwise you're expecting significant numbers of men to give up their careers instead which is even more unlikely, so my point stands.

Only in your gender-biased view

[northwind]

It's pouring none existent money in at tax payers risk. Can you really see any benefit to this?!

Heh, avoiding the question ;)

Yes, I can see huge possible benefits. As long as we're trying to operate with the current financial system, the lack of inter-institution wholesale lending is a huge issue, it's killing companies. I know a lot of people on here would say "Who cares if the banks are having a hard time, they charged me £20 for an overdraft once so I hate them" but Woolworths would have had a buyer if the consortium involved had been able to get lending, and that would have (temporarily, at least) saved Zavvi, and so on.

We're not neccesarily talking huge sums here either... I'm dealing with companies going into administration daily just now, generally for short-term reasons. Some are lame dogs but some are profitable companies suffering a short-term crisis, who would usually be able to get loan cover, but currently can't.

Course, it could turn out in ten years that it's just piling up problems, but it's not a categorically stupid thing to do, and would definately have some benefits as well as the potential for problems. It's not an open and shut thing.

[gettin2dizzy]

Heh, avoiding the question ;)

Yes, I can see huge possible benefits. As long as we're trying to operate with the current financial system, the lack of inter-institution wholesale lending is a huge issue, it's killing companies. I know a lot of people on here would say "Who cares if the banks are having a hard time, they charged me £20 for an overdraft once so I hate them" but Woolworths would have had a buyer if the consortium involved had been able to get lending, and that would have (temporarily, at least) saved Zavvi, and so on.

We're not neccesarily talking huge sums here either... I'm dealing with companies going into administration daily just now, generally for short-term reasons. Some are lame dogs but some are profitable companies suffering a short-term crisis, who would usually be able to get loan cover, but currently can't.

Course, it could turn out in ten years that it's just piling up problems, but it's not a categorically stupid thing to do, and would definately have some benefits as well as the potential for problems. It's not an open and shut thing.
But it will artificially hold house prices up, well above their worth just postponing the situation and elevating it to higher risk. If they want an influx of first time buyers, you have to give them the chance by allowing a correction of the housing market.

Raise interest rates so the banks can earn some money, cut stamp duty and then stop ****ing around. There would be far less turbulence if people knew that the Government wouldn't be changing the rules every 5 minutes.

As for savers, I was commenting that the government that is preaching prudence is then irresponsibly promoting even higher debt levels. Up interest rates, and don't devalue the pound.

[jimmy__riddle]

But it will artificially hold house prices up, well above their worth just postponing the situation and elevating it to higher risk.

everything is worth what people are willing to pay for it. If you cant afford a house then rent, its not a big deal. people seem to think the housing market will magically return to 1980 prices. it wont. house prices in many other countries have rocketed as well. this combined with the weak poun means that there will always be a large demand for UK housing, wither from domestic of foreign sources.

[gettin2dizzy]

everything is worth what people are willing to pay for it. If you cant afford a house then rent, its not a big deal. people seem to think the housing market will magically return to 1980 prices. it wont. house prices in many other countries have rocketed as well. this combined with the weak poun means that there will always be a large demand for UK housing, wither from domestic of foreign sources.
Yes, but it's market value at that moment in time. Houses won't be able to stay that high, as it was only possible by the availability of obscene mortgage deals, which are no longer available. MPs are simply protecting their own interests (with so many having two tax-payer funded houses). Have a look at house prices over in Ireland as an example of unsustainable housing prices.

Check this out:
http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/graphs-average-house-price.php

[jimmy__riddle]

Yes, but it's market value at that moment in time. Houses won't be able to stay that high, as it was only possible by the availability of obscene mortgage deals, which are no longer available. MPs are simply protecting their own interests (with so many having two tax-payer funded houses). Have a look at house prices over in Ireland as an example of unsustainable housing prices.

Check this out:
http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/graphs-average-house-price.php

That graph shows that at current prices were not that far off the trendline. mortgage deals are still availabe, you just need 10-15% deposit.

[carty]

You're wrong.

The Scots just decided to spend some of the money they were given in that way.

They probably had to sacrifice something else for that - but as I understand it they dont get any specific cash for Free Prescriptions


You're missing the point of what I'm saying - what I'm getting at is that without huge support from English taxpayers the Scottish would still have to pay for things like this. Conversely if Scotland wasn't given loads of financial support then maybe the English could have free prescriptions, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-Scotland or anything just making a point.

*cough* I don't like Andy Murray though *cough*

[SoulKiss]

You're missing the point of what I'm saying - what I'm getting at is that without huge support from English taxpayers the Scottish would still have to pay for things like this. Conversely if Scotland wasn't given loads of financial support then maybe the English could have free prescriptions, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not anti-Scotland or anything just making a point.

*cough* I don't like Andy Murray though *cough*


Despite the Scottish Parliament, Scotland is STILL part of Great Britain.

Therefore it gets a proportion of the money that is given out by the Government.

It DOES NOT get any extra money "from English taxpayers", it just decides how to spend the money it gets, the same money as it has gotten since before it was free to make decisions like that.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Despite the Scottish Parliament, Scotland is STILL part of Great Britain.

Therefore it gets a proportion of the money that is given out by the Government.

It DOES NOT get any extra money "from English taxpayers", it just decides how to spend the money it gets, the same money as it has gotten since before it was free to make decisions like that.

I agree that whether the Scots get extra money or not, and how they choose to spend it are two entirely seperate issues as you suggest.

However, the claim that Scotland doesn't get any extra money is rubbish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_Formula

[carty]

Therefore it gets a proportion of the money that is given out by the Government.

A higher proportion than is contributed? If Scotland could only spend the money collected from taxpayers earning money in Scotland, I doubt they'd be able to offer free prescriptions and the like...it is because the country is subsidised that they can do this.

Heck, England is subsidised too though, people's pension funds and other sources have been funding England over and above what is collected in taxes for a long time.

[gettin2dizzy]

Don't forget how much oil scotland has given us ;)

[punyXpress]

Hardly serving the people :)

When did they last do that ?? :confused:

[punyXpress]

Where have we heard that plan before ?! :rolleyes:

I'm now left in no doubt we have a bunch of idiots running the country. I'd hoped prices would fall far enough to allow us first time buyers to have even the smallest of chances to buy. What an ********.

Amazing!
There's a massive shortage of affordable housing.
There's a massive surplus of unemployed builders & tilers ( yes, Timwilky, I'm thinking of your lad )
Instead of propping up an unsustainable market, why not try for once doing something that stands a chance of ameloirating TWO problems?

ps: I liked the one about Sub-Prime Minister!

[northwind]

But it will artificially hold house prices up, well above their worth just postponing the situation and elevating it to higher risk. If they want an influx of first time buyers, you have to give them the chance by allowing a correction of the housing market.


Ah, so this is that well-known phenomenon whereby reducing the availability of mortgages helps first time buyers? :confused: The first people to suffer when mortgage lending reduces are the high LTV and high multiplier mortgages, ie, first time buyers.

[gettin2dizzy]

Ah, so this is that well-known phenomenon whereby reducing the availability of mortgages helps first time buyers? :confused: The first people to suffer when mortgage lending reduces are the high LTV and high multiplier mortgages, ie, first time buyers.
Just because I don't support this movement, it doesn't mean I support the governments other decisions.

Anyway, if mortgages are readily available but house prices are high; how does that help the LTV?!

[northwind]

I never said it does- but you suggested that the current situation will benefit them, which is nonsense. it actually inconveniences everyone while benefitting no-one. It's harder now for first time buyers than at any time in the last decade... Our lending to new homeowners is currently 7% of what it was a year ago.

[gettin2dizzy]

I never said it does- but you suggested that the current situation will benefit them, which is nonsense. it actually inconveniences everyone while benefitting no-one. It's harder now for first time buyers than at any time in the last decade... Our lending to new homeowners is currently 7% of what it was a year ago.
You can get a half decent mortgage with a 10% deposit and decent credit record. Times aren't as 'tough' as people like to make out. House prices coming down does help first time buyers as the further the drop in house price, the higher the LTV of their deposit.

[northwind]

Times aren't as 'tough' as people like to make out.

Ah, just go and google it, the numbers speak for themselves. November alone saw first time loans fall by 19%, on a figure already only 43% what it was last year- that's a bigger fall than general mortgage lending, which has also fallen by issue and by volume. We're the UK's biggest mortgage lender and we've slashed first time lending absolutely to the bone.

[gettin2dizzy]

Ah, just go and google it, the numbers speak for themselves. November alone saw first time loans fall by 19%, on a figure already only 43% what it was last year- that's a bigger fall than general mortgage lending, which has also fallen by issue and by volume. We're the UK's biggest mortgage lender and we've slashed first time lending absolutely to the bone.
Yes. But causation and correlation are entirely separate. People are less inclined to buy when prices are dropping, and banks aren't lending as irresponsibly as they were before. It's 'business as usual' so to speak. If you're a good candidate, the loan is there for you.

[northwind]

Ah, so the fall in first time buyers is a sign that things are good for first time buyers. And black is white. You can't argue that first time lending isn't being hammered and have any credibility I'm afraid. Usually I like these threads because you usually have an interesting and informed point of view, here you're just ignoring facts that don't suit you.

[gettin2dizzy]

Ah, so the fall in first time buyers is a sign that things are good for first time buyers. And black is white. You can't argue that first time lending isn't being hammered and have any credibility I'm afraid. Usually I like these threads because you usually have an interesting and informed point of view, here you're just ignoring facts that don't suit you.
Hehe. It's just the beer ;)

But yes; things are good for FTB. The numbers of sales have dropped as they can see that prices will continue to fall until they are obtainable, by which point their deposits will represent a far higher value in relation to their loan. You'll also notice that sales have dropped across all markets, including buy to let - as it's just a risky time to put so much capital at stake.

I can see nothing but benefit in the fact that >100% mortgages aren't being offered.

[northwind]

Yeah, those only made sense in a growing market and under the right circumstances (they're not actually in themselves a bad idea, defaults on 100+% mortgages are lower than most because of the selection measures generally used), right now they're madness. But even 90% is now harder to get, loan ratios are often lower, and rates are much higher (remember if you're comparing rates that you have to take into account base rate- rates are 4% less today than a year ago)

[Biker Biggles]

Yeah, those only made sense in a growing market and under the right circumstances (they're not actually in themselves a bad idea, defaults on 100+% mortgages are lower than most because of the selection measures generally used), right now they're madness. But even 90% is now harder to get, loan ratios are often lower, and rates are much higher (remember if you're comparing rates that you have to take into account base rate- rates are 4% less today than a year ago)

Defaults lower?I assume that is historically,and not expected to continue when property values have dropped by 20% with perhaps another 20% to come?Northy---As a business insider I think you may be missing the wider perception slowly but surely dawning on the lay society.We are witnessing a sea change here,and nothing will be the same again especially the home loan market.A bit like feeding dead cows to live ones(remember BSE)what has been seen as sensible to the experts is now seen to be insane behaviour by the rest of us,and I suspect high LTV mortgages will be seen in a similar light.Id like to see them banned by the regulator allbeit rather too late.