We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Support for mortgage interest benefit cut by thousands of pounds
Comments
-
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »You know what gives me a little glow?
Knowing that champagne socialists with three kids on household incomes of 60K or 70K will not now be given £25,000 or so of our tax money over the next decade.
Who knew cuts would be so much fun....:D
The champagne socialists I've met in person aren't into kicking people out on the street because they get a benefit from the state they personally can't get.
I'm not cynical I'm realistic
(If a link I give opens pop ups I won't know I don't use windows)0 -
you've done well to confuse the two points - i like it.Graham_Devon wrote: »What must be true? My sarcastic point about it being said 56 times?
Or people having equity in houses?
The first bit, my point, HAS been said over and over, by myself, even on this thread.
The second point about people having equity in their houses...well, think this is pretty much a given for many, and not just some blase assumption by myself.
I'm not really sure what your point actually is. I was discussing something with you and suddenly the discussion has stopped and some vague sentence has been put together as a put me down.
but let's try and keep them seperate so that it's clear...
firstly - SMI is a cheaper alternative to LHA, so less of a burden on the state.
secondly - regarding those on SMI that have equity. according to you and many others in the HPI cult, prices have not risen in the last 18 months and most people bought on 100% mortgages or very high LTV's anyway . so those that bought in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 will all be in negative equity or very close to it without equity... so that's killed that theory. even though it's been mentioned on her 55 times it doesn't make it anymore true or reality...0 -
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards