PCCABE Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) Oh FFS. You're nitpicking on a Bluto scale now. We have the Thatcher government of 1979 to thank for the fact that many more people from traditional working class backgrounds are now home owners. That fact is not refutable. Thatcher was born, she did exist, she was PM, and it was HER government that facilitated the changes that improved the lives of millions of working class families. As for the WWI comment - it's quite clear what I am saying. PCANGRY - with his history degree - doesn't appear to know what happened during the FIRST WORLD WAR. He's proved that yet again with his comment about Pearl Harbour. I'm now guessing that he thinks the Japanese bombed Hawai'i flying Aichi's, Nakajima's and Mitsubishi's off aircraft carriers in 1917 - the year before the first aircraft carrier came into existence. It's an unequivocal fact that the US joined the Allies in 1917 to defeat the Germans in the First World War. It's an unequivocal fact that the US came to the UK's assistance during our hour of need. Of course given the daft coppers past record there's little to suggest he knows that Pearl Harbour is actually on the island of O'ahu in Hawai'i as he appears to think that Pakistan and the Taliban are in Iraq. Did I say Pearl Harbour happened during WW1 you scummy idiot?Typical f**king Tory you make things up. You really are a twat. I am just glad that unlike you I am proud to be working class and don't betray everything my forefathers worked for by voting for anti working class party. Edited November 20, 2015 by PCCABE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 I've no got the energy today. CONSTABLE Looking forward to tonight though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCCABE Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 I've no got the energy today. CONSTABLE Looking forward to tonight though. I do hope you win even if I would enjoy dicko being upset if you lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) I think you'll find that the house remained there. It wasn't a David Copperfield magic trick where the property disappeared. So the number of houses remained the same. Absolutely. How much does it cost to rent that house now that it's in private hands compared to the cost when it was a council house? Do you understand the difference between being physically available and being financially available? Are you understanding the problem or are you simply in ostrich "Toaaaarrrrrreeeeeessssss can do no wrong" mode? Edited November 20, 2015 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCCABE Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) Absolutely. How much does it cost to rent that house now that it's in private hands compared to the cost when it was a council house? Do you understand the difference between being physically available and being financially available? Are you understanding the problem or are you simply in ostrich "Toaaaarrrrrreeeeeessssss can do no wrong" mode? I will just never get my head round why anybody from a working class background can possibly think the public schoolboys in the Tory party give one f**k about them. Edited November 20, 2015 by PCCABE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted November 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 Absolutely. How much does it cost to rent that house now that it's in private hands compared to the cost when it was a council house? Do you understand the difference between being physically available and being financially available? Are you understanding the problem or are you simply in ostrich "Toaaaarrrrrreeeeeessssss can do no wrong" mode? I don't think private rent prices are excessive. It appears that if a landlord gets a 5% yield off their property they are doing well. That might cover the cost of a mortgage but it doesn't cover the risk of the property lying empty, tenant that fall into arrears, maintenance of the property, and the possibility of a tenant willfully damaging the property. The properties are all physically available, it's just some people appear to expect everyone else to fund their lifestyle choices Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 I don't think private rent prices are excessive. Of course you don't. You earn £250,000 a year fixing broken pipes. Back in the real world however where mere mortals earn on average £25k, this leaves them with around £20k after tax and NI or approx £1700 per month. For a person with a family having to pay rent in excess of £1000 per month to live in a decent house in any major city is absolutely catastrophic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 I don't think private rent prices are excessive. It appears that if a landlord gets a 5% yield off their property they are doing well. That might cover the cost of a mortgage but it doesn't cover the risk of the property lying empty, tenant that fall into arrears, maintenance of the property, and the possibility of a tenant willfully damaging the property. The properties are all physically available, it's just some people appear to expect everyone else to fund their lifestyle choices It's not about the yield FFS.The yield is almost irrelevant. Owning a BTL is about capital growth. Honestly, is there anything you DO know about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted November 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) It's not about the yield FFS.The yield is almost irrelevant. Owning a BTL is about capital growth. Honestly, is there anything you DO know about? Oh FFS. And you tried to claim a few weeks ago that you were a businessman. f**king hell Oaksoft. I've never read anything so ridiculous. Edited to add - sorry yes I have read something so ridiculous. Yesterday. When that other fanny - who says he has a degree in History - claimed the US didn't come to the UK's help in our hour of need. But you are running him close. Edited November 20, 2015 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCCABE Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 Oh FFS. And you tried to claim a few weeks ago that you were a businessman. f**king hell Oaksoft. I've never read anything so ridiculous. Edited to add - sorry yes I have read something so ridiculous. Yesterday. When that other fanny - who says he has a degree in History - claimed the US didn't come to the UK's help in our hour of need. But you are running him close. You claim you can read thicko dicko. You clearly can't. Go to work and stop skiving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted November 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 Erm....naw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) Oh FFS. And you tried to claim a few weeks ago that you were a businessman. f**king hell Oaksoft. I've never read anything so ridiculous. Edited to add - sorry yes I have read something so ridiculous. Yesterday. When that other fanny - who says he has a degree in History - claimed the US didn't come to the UK's help in our hour of need. But you are running him close. Fair enough. Let's ask the Office for National Statistics. They say that a house bought for £24k in 1980 has seen this increase in capital gain ever sinc. Compare the following ONS figures showing captial growth on the average property with your 5% (soon to be taxed to the hilt) average rental yield. Look at these numbers and with a straight face tell me that the annual yield of 5% is the real attraction for Buy to Letters. TBH I think you numerically incompetent. The ONS is however unbiased as regards your abilities. Let's see shall we:- 1980 - £24,000. 1981 - £24,000 1982 - £24,000. 1983 - £26,000 1984 - £29,000. 1985 - £31,000 1986 - £36,000. 1987 - £40,000 1988 - £49,000. 1989 - £55,000 1990 - £60,000. 1991 - £62,000 1992 - £61,000. 1993 - £64,000 1994 - £66,000. 1995 - £67,000 1996 - £70,000. 1997 - £78,000 1998 - £87,000. 1999 - £96,000 2000 - £109,000. 2001 - £116,000 2002 - £136,000. 2003 - £155,000 2004 - £173,000. 2005 - £184,000 2006 - £193,000. 2007 - £214,000 2008 - £211,000. 2009 - £194,000 2010 - £209,000. 2011 - £215,000 2012 - £230,000. 2013 - £242,000 Edited November 20, 2015 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 For balance, 5% compounded interest on £24k over the same period of time would be just £114k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 It's sums, oaky, he doesn't do sums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) TBH I think you numerically incompetent. Only numerically? The only thing he seems to be competent at is making a complete James Hunt of himself. Edited November 20, 2015 by FTOF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 No, he just doesn't do sums, that's been proven time and time again. Probably explains him failing the plumber training and ending up a pipefitter all the same... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 Can I refer you to the first part of my post? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 He didn't even need to do sums for what he claimed, he just read it off his tax return - allegedly. It was me who did the sums and they were correct, albeit an approximation, based on his claim. I think we should just leave it at he is a lying, bigoted, innumerate, stupid, analphabetic, Nazi c**t. I think that should cover it. Who doesn't do sums.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 He doesn't know what that means. Analphabetic, remember? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cambiebud Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 I don't think Nationalists are having a good week at all. Have you seen the polls Mr D? Aye the 1st minister must be worried......Not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 Aye doctors vote to strike (only 98% of them) in Englandshire but it's a bad week for SNP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 This cold weather has reminded me of those two terrible winters we had , back in the seventies . . Yes , Mike and Bernie. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted November 20, 2015 Report Share Posted November 20, 2015 This cold weather has reminded me of those two terrible winters we had , back in the seventies . . Yes , Mike and Bernie. .Badoom-tish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted November 21, 2015 Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 tbh i am disappointed dicko hasnt come back to argue why my suggestion that 250k is a bigger number than 120k is the most stupid thing he has ever heard. very disappointed. by now usually him and his bag of aliases would be all over this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted November 21, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2015 Oaksoft. You're a businessman that's going to fail badly if you think you can run a business based on profits you might get in 40 years time. You're the very man who has criticised people who feel wealthy because their property has a value they'll never see and yet here you think someone buying a house to let is going to do it for exactly that. Its ALL about the yield. Don't believe me? Check out any website on the subject, look at what all the experts say, do a Google search for advice. Not one of them ignores yield and talks about the capital gain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.