The Referendum Thread

[oaksoft]

So tell me Oaksoft, where in your vision of houses does this fit into the idea you've pushed that a new Independent Scotland will be an opportunity to set up a fairer society? Where are your drawing the line between who deserves to buy a house and who doesn't?

Lets say here we're talking about a fairly modest house - £90,000 in value. Now I don't know what kind of income multiples banks lend on these days but back when I bought my first house the rule of thumb was 3 x annual salary. So I guess in your world your average school teacher deserves to be elevated to a situation where he can borrow the money from the bank on a capital and interest loan paying - according to Money Supermarket - around £378 per month. Lets say this teacher is 30 years old, but the time he is 55 he'll own his house out right and he'll have paid around £143,313 - again according to Money Supermarket and if they get their application form in on time they can get a £20 M&S Voucher as a reward!

However from the same school the 30 year old teaching assistant who helps that teacher in class only earns £15,500 per annum - according to the TES website. The income multiples mean she can only borrow £46,500 and she will struggle to find a house in that price range so - under your rules - she now has to rent from the council paying the around £250 per month. Now her payments will only ever go up. There's no fluctuation based on interest rate changes, just a guaranteed rise in the cost of her housing every year in line with inflation. Assuming she's unfortunate enough to live till she's 80 her right to a roof over her head will have cost her £150,000 not taking into account annual inflationary increases - and she's still not got a home.

What is wrong with saying to that woman - you've been a good tenant for 30 years and you've looked after our property for us and paid your rent on time. Would you like to buy your house at 60% cheaper than the going market rate.

So much for this hatred of Thatcher - it looks to me from all angles as though her policy in this area was far more socially fair than anything the Scottish Parliament is doing.

Are you seriously asking me to explain why a person earning £15,000 should not be allowed to take out a £90,000 mortgage ???????

BTW I'm not sure what kind of house you are thinking about owning for £90,000.

Tghe average house price in the UK is an eye watering £160,000.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-27037763

Even your teacher shouldn't be borrowing that kind of money.

Here's how you get the fairness.

You prevent borrowing more than 3 times your wages and you ban joint incomes.

Then you simply wait for the inevitable house price drop.

Yes some will lose out on negative equity but the greater good is at stake.

The average house price should be 3 times the average wage in the country.

That means average house price should be around £80k to £120k so we're still WAY overpricing our housing stock.

It certainly used to be that way in the mid 90's before craziness set in across the UK.

Once prices reach that level on average, your £15k assistant will be able to buy at the low end as befits a low wage. At least he'll have a house.

Edited June 27, 2014 by oaksoft

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Tax payers in Scotland already contribute to set up and on going costs for uk wide depts and new ventures / systems. I'd be more interested in comparing the difference - unfortunately uk gov won't play ball.

[Stuart Dickson]

You are grasping at straws here, the 30 years of rent wont even cover the cost of borrowing the capital, building the house and then maintaining it for 30 years. Local authorities have enough to contend with without getting involved in the property market-most of them were damend glad to offload their rental stock onto housing associations who would build more if they could raise the capital-but governments won't allow that as it affects the profits of private builders.

i thought you were a free-market champion who wants to see everything that comes from central and local government outsourced to the private sector-not someone who champions state involvement in the private housing sector.

Time you made yer mind up, little man.

I'm on my mobile phone and I know I get fewer posts on a page than on a desktop but two pages back I answered you saying that I thought housing association should act as developers. Now correct me if I'm wrong but aren't housing associations Social Enterprises?

I'm also intregued that you say it's "government" that stop them from becoming developers. I take it you mean Scottish Government cause in the last two days there have been a couple of Social Enterprise projects highlighted on TV, in London, who are building houses and buying to sell and to rent.

Right to buy was all about raising capital right from day one. It's a policy that was socially fair in that it gave everyone the opportunity to buy their home. The flaw in the policy was that the revenue from the sales wasnt put back into development in a sustainable way. Taking away the Right to Buy removes the opportunity for large amounts of capital to be raised. Those 93 MSPs who voted the policy down should be hounded out of office, not lauded with a Yes vote.

[Stuart Dickson]

Are you seriously asking me to explain why a person earning £15,000 should not be allowed to take out a £90,000 mortgage ???????

BTW I'm not sure what kind of house you are thinking about owning for £90,000.

Tghe average house price in the UK is an eye watering £160,000.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-27037763

Even your teacher shouldn't be borrowing that kind of money.

Here's how you get the fairness.

You prevent borrowing more than 3 times your wages and you ban joint incomes.

Then you simply wait for the inevitable house price drop.

Yes some will lose out on negative equity but the greater good is at stake.

The average house price should be 3 times the average wage in the country.

That means average house price should be around £80k to £120k so we're still WAY overpricing our housing stock.

It certainly used to be that way in the mid 90's before craziness set in across the UK.

Once prices reach that level on average, your £15k assistant will be able to buy at the low end as befits a low wage. At least he'll have a house.

So, let me get this straight, you think the route to greater fairness is for current home owners to see the vast majority of their lifetime earnings - so far put into their property - wiped out "for the greater good"? Tell me Oaksoft, oh great economic guru, what happens when we have a housing crash in the UK? What happens to the economy? To jobs? To the size of the budget deficit? What happens to the banks? What happens to welfare benefits? Surely you must remember. I mean I know you're f**ked but surely you can cast your mind back to the last 6 years and see exactly what you are proposing should happen again - in the interests of the "greater good".

For the record and for clarity I have never suggested someone on £15,000pa should be given a mortgage of £90,000. Right to Buy didn't do that either. What it did do was it offered long term council tenants the opportunity to buy their own family homes for a discount of up to 60% of the market value of the property on the day of the sale. It put that £90,000 home within the reach of those on lower incomes as a 60% discount on that would mean they were getting their homes for £36,000 - well within the reach of their £15,000 income.

And finally I love the fact that you think all first time buyers should only buy houses that are at the "average price". There are plenty of £90k houses out there on the market - and they are generally bought by first time buyers. If there wasn't £90k houses available the "average price" would be much higher - but then you should know that given that you're a super brainy scientist and all that

[Stuart Dickson]

They are 2 totally unrelated issues - stop trying to connect things that aren't connected.

Really? The competence and standard of politician that we have at Hollyrood right now shouldn't be a factor in whether we vote to either give them or to deny them sole power to rule over us?

You must be more gullible than I ever thought.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Stop twisting and spinning dicko! It's not big or clever and your not impressing anyone...other than yourself.

[Stuart Dickson]

I see this morning that the newspapers are all like this

And while I am at it, on the subject of the competency of politicians at Holyrood - I see that Senior SNP MSP Christina McKelvie believes that all of the abuse aimed at JK Rowling a few weeks ago was done by UK spies. I guess she'll be yet another Nationalist that will be locked away from the press and kept quiet by the SNP "for her own good" over the coming weeks.

The cost of this silly referendum forced on the country by less than 20% of the population has cost £13,3m already. That's 26 stand alone state of the art 3g football pitches with changing facilities that could have been placed all around Scotland to tackle obesity amongst our kids, to get kids off the streets and out of trouble, and to improve the standards of footballers in this country. Who knows had we not pissed away all this money on a silly referendum we may still have had the kind of levels of inward investment into business that English, Welsh and Northern Irish residents are currently enjoying.

I hope the Scottish electorate remember Alex Salmonds folly for many, many years to come.

[Stuart Dickson]

Stop twisting and spinning dicko! It's not big or clever and your not impressing anyone...other than yourself.

Just as I'm not trying to impress anyone, neither am I spinning or twisting.

The Yes Campaign is as dead as Englands 2014 World Cup Campaign.

[Isle Of Bute Saint]

Labour top officials in the Scotsman making a big noise regarding there will need to be border controls in the event of a yes vote. Just like Belgium to Luxembourg , holland to Germany , Germany to Austria . Denmark to Sweden , France to Spain and Spain to Portugal. FFS is this what the better together come up with.

[Stuart Dickson]

Labour top officials in the Scotsman making a big noise regarding there will need to be border controls in the event of a yes vote. Just like Belgium to Luxembourg , holland to Germany , Germany to Austria . Denmark to Sweden , France to Spain and Spain to Portugal. FFS is this what the better together come up with.

Nope - just like the UK currently has from France, Belgium, Netherlands, Ireland, etc.

Look, I don't know if there will be a need for border patrols or not, but I suspect that on the balance of probability we will need some sort of border control. The reason is that the SNP are making noises around having an open door policy to immigrants. There's no problem with that of course, except we all know that most non EU immigrants prefer to live in England, particularly in the South East of England, where they believe there are greater riches. I would imagine that the rUK would have to put in place some sort of measure to ensure that it's immigration policy was being controlled to ensure that Scotland wasn't simply being used as a back door past the ports and airports.

[FTOF]

Labour top officials in the Scotsman making a big noise regarding there will need to be border controls in the event of a yes vote. Just like Belgium to Luxembourg , holland to Germany , Germany to Austria . Denmark to Sweden , France to Spain and Spain to Portugal. FFS is this what the better together come up with.

They've been very quiet of late, so they were due to make a c**t of themselves round about now.

They never disappoint.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Nope - just like the UK currently has from France, Belgium, Netherlands, Ireland, etc.

Look, I don't know if there will be a need for border patrols or not, but I suspect that on the balance of probability we will need some sort of border control. The reason is that the SNP are making noises around having an open door policy to immigrants. There's no problem with that of course, except we all know that most non EU immigrants prefer to live in England, particularly in the South East of England, where they believe there are greater riches. I would imagine that the rUK would have to put in place some sort of measure to ensure that it's immigration policy was being controlled to ensure that Scotland wasn't simply being used as a back door past the ports and airports.

Far be it from me to point out that you lie, or even that you just talk shite...but you might want to read through that post again...

[Stuart Dickson]

Far be it from me to point out that you lie, or even that you just talk shite...but you might want to read through that post again...

?

[thepaisleypanda]

Nope - just like the UK currently has from France, Belgium, Netherlands, Ireland, etc.

Look, I don't know if there will be a need for border patrols or not, but I suspect that on the balance of probability we will need some sort of border control. The reason is that the SNP are making noises around having an open door policy to immigrants. There's no problem with that of course, except we all know that most non EU immigrants prefer to live in England, particularly in the South East of England, where they believe there are greater riches. I would imagine that the rUK would have to put in place some sort of measure to ensure that it's immigration policy was being controlled to ensure that Scotland wasn't simply being used as a back door past the ports and airports.

Now, Why would THAT be?

[flyingscot]

Nope - just like the UK currently has from France, Belgium, Netherlands, Ireland, etc.

Look, I don't know if there will be a need for border patrols or not, but I suspect that on the balance of probability we will need some sort of border control. The reason is that the SNP are making noises around having an open door policy to immigrants. There's no problem with that of course, except we all know that most non EU immigrants prefer to live in England, particularly in the South East of England, where they believe there are greater riches. I would imagine that the rUK would have to put in place some sort of measure to ensure that it's immigration policy was being controlled to ensure that Scotland wasn't simply being used as a back door past the ports and airports.

The UK has no border controls from Ireland as it's in a common travel area. If you drive from Belfast to Dublin or take a ferry to Ireland all you notice are the road signs changing to kilometers.

I suspect most immigrants prefer to go to London due to it's large population of migrants, you just go to the part of London where your community resides and it's easier to settle in.

[Bud Bundy]

Really? The competence and standard of politician that we have at Hollyrood right now shouldn't be a factor in whether we vote to either give them or to deny them sole power to rule over us?

You must be more gullible than I ever thought.

Really? The competence and standard of politician that we have at Hollyrood right now shouldn't be a factor in whether we vote to either give them or to deny them sole power to rule over us?

You must be more gullible than I ever thought.

Really Stuart, I give you, Cammeron, Clegg, Milliband, And Lamont, Davidson, Rennie, All are equal in the condecening pish that They have in Common with The Rt whorable Bull Shitter from Pishy ?

[Guest TPAFKATS]

The UK has no border controls from Ireland as it's in a common travel area. If you drive from Belfast to Dublin or take a ferry to Ireland all you notice are the road signs changing to kilometers.

I suspect most immigrants prefer to go to London due to it's large population of migrants, you just go to the part of London where your community resides and it's easier to settle in.

Indeed. The uk also has no borders with Netherlands or Belgium either. In addition to this he lies when stating that SNP has an open door policy to immigration.

[faraway saint]

With 20% of posts in this thread I declare Stu the winner.....................................although I doubt anyone cares, apart fro the other 4/5 contributors.

Does ANYBODY read this "tit for tat" so called "debate"?

[Guest TPAFKATS]

I guess you've read enough of it to care faraway...good input.

[faraway saint]

I guess you've read enough of it to care faraway...good input.

Aye, way beyond reading the same "talking in circles" bollox and point scoring.

Thanks anyway.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Sigh...

[faraway saint]

Sigh...

4 people contributed 44% of the posts, majority becoming a "I'm better than you" game.

I'm loving it.

PS NAW!

[Guest TPAFKATS]

That's nice...

[salmonbuddie]

Ok, it's a pro-Yes website, and biased, but think about who you're voting with if you're voting No.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/zero-tolerance/

[salmonbuddie]

With 20% of posts in this thread I declare Stu the winner.....................................although I doubt anyone cares, apart fro the other 4/5 contributors.

Does ANYBODY read this "tit for tat" so called "debate"?

I do, it's important.

Am I one of the 4/5 you talk about? Don't mind if I am, as long as no-one thinks I'm StuD, that really would be too far.....

Edited June 28, 2014 by salmonbuddie