while poor ITK is still shaking with fury about a foreigner living in Belgravia, Tory loon Osborne announces a (socialist) policy to subsidise mortgages that will lead to another artificial property price boom, rent price rises...just like the one that lead directly to the great financial meltdown in the USA in '07.

Contrary to their claims, Tories love socialism as well : they just hate given it to the most down trodden but dish out taxpayers money to private corporations or the middle class.

Osborne should be embarking on a massive social home building scheme which will solve housing problems, stabilise prices and rents and save the building industry and all industry associated with it, and....create a asset base for the country.

prove me wrong.

hedda wrote:
while poor ITK is still shaking with fury about a foreigner living in Belgravia, Tory loon Osborne announces a (socialist) policy to subsidise mortgages that will lead to another artificial property price boom, rent price rises...just like the one that lead directly to the great financial meltdown in the USA in '07.

Contrary to their claims, Tories love socialism as well : they just hate given it to the most down trodden but dish out taxpayers money to private corporations or the middle class.

Osborne should be embarking on a massive social home building scheme which will solve housing problems, stabilise prices and rents and save the building industry and all industry associated with it, and....create a asset base for the country.

prove me wrong.

Actually we have a long way to go before we enter another housing 'boom & bust'.
Osborne has been a useless chancellor,but at least he's getting this right.
Social housing? Who wants to go back to those crime ridden housing estates of yore? Go back to the mortgage tax relief Maggie removed,encourage genuine people to buy,not rent.

hedda wrote:
Tories love socialism as well : they just hate given it to the most down trodden.

It was giving money to the "down trodden" that caused the USA 07 crash !

Giving mortgages to people who couldnt afford them - letting them loose with credit cards - utter madness (which we are now paying for).

True wrote:
hedda wrote:
while poor ITK is still shaking with fury about a foreigner living in Belgravia, Tory loon Osborne announces a (socialist) policy to subsidise mortgages that will lead to another artificial property price boom, rent price rises...just like the one that lead directly to the great financial meltdown in the USA in '07.

Contrary to their claims, Tories love socialism as well : they just hate given it to the most down trodden but dish out taxpayers money to private corporations or the middle class.

Osborne should be embarking on a massive social home building scheme which will solve housing problems, stabilise prices and rents and save the building industry and all industry associated with it, and....create a asset base for the country.

prove me wrong.

Actually we have a long way to go before we enter another housing 'boom & bust'.
Osborne has been a useless chancellor,but at least he's getting this right.
Social housing? Who wants to go back to those crime ridden housing estates of yore? Go back to the mortgage tax relief Maggie removed,encourage genuine people to buy,not rent.

But council housing doesn't have to be ticky-tacky houses on estates.
They could build proper streets in already established areas rather than separating and stigmatising people which is just asking for trouble.

True wrote:
hedda wrote:
while poor ITK is still shaking with fury about a foreigner living in Belgravia, Tory loon Osborne announces a (socialist) policy to subsidise mortgages that will lead to another artificial property price boom, rent price rises...just like the one that lead directly to the great financial meltdown in the USA in '07.

Contrary to their claims, Tories love socialism as well : they just hate given it to the most down trodden but dish out taxpayers money to private corporations or the middle class.

Osborne should be embarking on a massive social home building scheme which will solve housing problems, stabilise prices and rents and save the building industry and all industry associated with it, and....create a asset base for the country.

prove me wrong.

Actually we have a long way to go before we enter another housing 'boom & bust'.
Osborne has been a useless chancellor,but at least he's getting this right.
Social housing? Who wants to go back to those crime ridden housing estates of yore? Go back to the mortgage tax relief Maggie removed,encourage genuine people to buy,not rent.

No Maggoe sold off taxpayer assets at a knock down price and the all that remain are ghastly high rise estates.

You can build community housing that is decent and not all bulked together- as they do everywhere else. Blocks of apartments that are combined with private flats etc etc. Houses that are intermingled with privately owned property and that is what existed all over the UK and London before the great scam/sale by Maggie : Notting Hill, Chelsea, Kensington, st Johns Wood and even Belgravia ....council owned properties.

You are confusing the advent of drugs and associated crime and the loss of jobs with "estates" where until the 1960s they were filled with law abiding hard working "salt of the earth" etc etc.

So that's 3/10 marks for True who hasn't proved me wrong..(and stay behind in class) when even ITK agrees with me...yet has failed to aknowledge that it was the "free marketeers" of the Bush Administration that set in train the great 2007 meltdown.

What's to be done with my class of dills ??

Headmistress Hedda wrote:
True wrote:
hedda wrote:
while poor ITK is still shaking with fury about a foreigner living in Belgravia, Tory loon Osborne announces a (socialist) policy to subsidise mortgages that will lead to another artificial property price boom, rent price rises...just like the one that lead directly to the great financial meltdown in the USA in '07.

Contrary to their claims, Tories love socialism as well : they just hate given it to the most down trodden but dish out taxpayers money to private corporations or the middle class.

Osborne should be embarking on a massive social home building scheme which will solve housing problems, stabilise prices and rents and save the building industry and all industry associated with it, and....create a asset base for the country.

prove me wrong.

Actually we have a long way to go before we enter another housing 'boom & bust'.
Osborne has been a useless chancellor,but at least he's getting this right.
Social housing? Who wants to go back to those crime ridden housing estates of yore? Go back to the mortgage tax relief Maggie removed,encourage genuine people to buy,not rent.

No Maggoe sold off taxpayer assets at a knock down price and the all that remain are ghastly high rise estates.

You can build community housing that is decent and not all bulked together- as they do everywhere else. Blocks of apartments that are combined with private flats etc etc. Houses that are intermingled with privately owned property and that is what existed all over the UK and London before the great scam/sale by Maggie : Notting Hill, Chelsea, Kensington, st Johns Wood and even Belgravia ....council owned properties.

You are confusing the advent of drugs and associated crime and the loss of jobs with "estates" where until the 1960s they were filled with law abiding hard working "salt of the earth" etc etc.

So that's 3/10 marks for True who hasn't proved me wrong..(and stay behind in class) when even ITK agrees with me...yet has failed to aknowledge that it was the "free marketeers" of the Bush Administration that set in train the great 2007 meltdown.

What's to be done with my class of dills ??

Stop being silly veritas...it's time for your bath now

I have said this before, but I'll say it again.....for the hard of understanding......

The situation is this. We still need to borrow money as a nation to get by day-to-day.
To borrow, you need to demonstrate you are good for it, or willing to tighten belts elsewhere......
The budget and chancellor have no alternative to do this because WE CAN'T BORROW MORE MONEY or SPEND OUR WAY OUT because we just won't be loaned it from anywhere at prices we can afford (its bad enough at the current rate) or by credible sources and not loan shark deals....BASICS

Even this one track approach hasn't staved off the AAA rating drop! but we are one of few nations that is prepared to take the correct and honerable approach

So all this talk of Ed Balls about changing tack, U turns, spend your way out, invest etc.....is absolute and utter complete no hoper talk, desperation to be heared because nobody is listening....and I honestly don't think many are listening, because people are not thick (really....) and they know full well that debt needs paying back, its tough and that if we don't we'll be Greece, Spain or Cyprus.

These are cold hard facts that certain Politicians are trying to ignor and spin into something of an alternative way, a way that doesn't exist......agreed, you can always find bankers and financial bodies who would also say there is another way and they can help, but how do they generate profit? They sell loans, so of course they'd love to loan UK PLC more money but not in the interests of helping the UK, it is in the hope they gain from it themselves. SHARKS.

If the UK is to recover, it needs to pay down what is owes and settle the accounts.

www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/de...g-department-2011-12

Welfare (Work and Pensions) dwarfs Health ? How can it be that welfare to look after non contributers is outspending the NHS that is there for all ? IT IS NONSENSE and has to change otherwise there is no point in a country existing to only pay for non contributing citizens. Welfare should be for the minority who need it, not a silent population who expect it..........

is Mr Reason ITK in drag or visa versa?

hedda wrote:
is Mr Reason ITK in drag or visa versa?

ITK was stuck shadowing the chancellor's testicles on another thread

To clarify, I do not own or wear female clothing.

What I do is try to make it clear that no amount of Shadow Chancellor spiel will deflect me from looking at the cold hard facts of the UK PLC budgets and balance sheet and decide that the options being taken are the correct ones....they might not be the most socially acceptable, the most politically palatable ones, they might not agree with all commentators or financiers views......but see earlier post...financiers would have an alternate view, they can make money from further lending......its in their interests to make that option heared.....

.....and it still is not healthy to have a welfare budget so high above all other budgets....joblessness isn't the root cause for a high welfare bill....the root cause is the benefit spectrum....housing benefit, jobseeker benefit, fuel benefit, child benefit, incapacity benefit....... ad infinitem

* When is a benefit a benefit ? When it is given as a stopgap payment for a set period to somebody who needs support while getting over a redundancy whilst looking for other employment

When is a benefit not a benefit ? When it is given as a payment where there is no intention of the payment recipient looking to seek employment to start to generate tax back for the UK.

* Society has changed, its good that welfare looks after those who can't look after themselves, but welfare should never be morphed into a Govmt system where welfare replaces an active contributing society by becoming the sustaining force of the population, and replacing self motivation to be self sufficient

hedda wrote:
is Mr Reason ITK in drag or visa versa?

You are the one who "likes" womens clothing, Veri-hedda !

And how shallow minded to assume that because someone else doesnt agree with your balmy ideas they must be the same person (must come from attending all those Union meetings where, like clones and rabbits, they all say "aye" together).

Mr Reason wrote:
* Society has changed, its good that welfare looks after those who can't look after themselves, but welfare should never be morphed into a Govmt system where welfare replaces an active contributing society by becoming the sustaining force of the population, and replacing self motivation to be self sufficient

Thats gone right over their heads, Mr Reason ... can you repeat using words of only one syllable?

True wrote:
ITK was stuck shadowing the chancellor's testicles on another thread

They need keeping an eye on !

Wasn't it Mr Balls (and his MP wife Yvette something-or-there) that BOTH claimed mortgage relief payments on the SAME shared house in the recent MPs expenses scandal ?

Accidentally, of course - I would suggest otherwise !

He's such a busy man (cocking-up economies takes alot of time and effort !) that someone should "keep an eye" - just in case another "accident" slips through.

Mr Reason wrote:
To clarify, I do not own or wear female clothing.


you should try it dear. it's liberating.

neither of you have addressed the fact that by subsidising private houses it will create an artificial property boom.

hedda wrote:
neither of you have addressed the fact that by subsidising private houses it will create an artificial property boom.

Similar to the artificial property boom created by Nooo Loony Labour ?

In The Know wrote:
hedda wrote:
neither of you have addressed the fact that by subsidising private houses it will create an artificial property boom.

Similar to the artificial property boom created by Nooo Loony Labour ?

Or Maggie in the late 80s?

In The Know wrote:
hedda wrote:
neither of you have addressed the fact that by subsidising private houses it will create an artificial property boom.

Similar to the artificial property boom created by Nooo Loony Labour ?

yes. But begun by Maggie.

these failed experiments can be decades in the making.

hedda wrote:
yes. But begun by Maggie.

these failed experiments can be decades in the making.

What are you moaning about now, Hedda?
I thought you wanted jobs to be created?

new houses built ... new houses sold .... other people move up the ladder ... all part of the job creation process.

the problem (for you) is that you ONLY want the new houses to go to a certain type, isnt it? (those that CANNOT pay for them)

In The Know wrote:
hedda wrote:
yes. But begun by Maggie.

these failed experiments can be decades in the making.

What are you moaning about now, Hedda?
I thought you wanted jobs to be created?

new houses built ... new houses sold .... other people move up the ladder ... all part of the job creation process.

the problem (for you) is that you ONLY want the new houses to go to a certain type, isnt it? (those that CANNOT pay for them)

perhaps you just haven't read what the policy actually is : artificially creating a property market by handouts to people to gain a mortgage...you know what is mortgage is don't you ??....a debt and the illusion they 'own' something.

Alternatively the government could embark upon massive building programs where they finance and build properties (and at the same time create jobs) and own the assets they have just financed.

It's quite simple and your analogy that somehow a "certain type" will get to rent them is quite ugly.

hedda wrote:
perhaps you just haven't read what the policy actually is : artificially creating a property market by handouts to people to gain a mortgage...you know what is mortgage is don't you ??....a debt and the illusion they 'own' something.

.... but they WILL one something - a very valuable asset !

Alternatively the government could embark upon massive building programs where they finance and build properties (and at the same time create jobs) and own the assets they have just financed..

... ah, social housing !
So, we borrow money to build and then borrow even more money to give to someone (housing benefit) so they can pay us rent !

Meanwhile, we pay ALL the interest, plus the capital and get absolutely NOTHING in return !

Some logic !