100,000 could lose their homes if mortgages rise £20 a month

The_J

He may not agree with it, it's unclear though:

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Things can't be that bad!!! Can they?

Is that a rhetorical question? If so the insinuation is that things are that bad. If you don't agree with it surely the thread title would be along the lines of "Look what these morons have said now".

As such, it's a blatant attempt to push the 'misery bear' line. There's loads of stuff on the internet that is total BS, I don't feel the need to post a thread on every one disproving it.

Graham_Devon

Well, really we need to dissect it down a little futher.

- Did he make a gramatical or spelling error that can be picked up?
- Why did he only use 10 words*? Why not 12?
- What does the use of 10 words* actually mean? Is there is alterior motive to use such a word count?
- He didn't explicitly say he disagreed.....maybe this has an underhand meaing attached to it?
- He questioned it, instead of suggesting it was pap from the outset.
- If he questioned it, he could be just covering his tracks.
- Why did he question it? Does he need help understanding? If he didn't question it does that mean his mind is closed and needs to be pshyco-analysed?
- What is his response to the article? Should rates rise? Should they fall? Should small mammals be taught to do the tango? He doesn't say they shouldn't.....therefore he obviously does. We should report him for animal cruelty.

Only then can we draw some conclusions as to what I may, may not, have intended with this article.

*Probably wrong, couldn't be arised counting, though feel free to latch on.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well, really we need to dissect it down a little futher.

- Did he make a gramatical or spelling error that can be picked up?
- Why did he only use 10 words*? Why not 12?
- What does the use of 10 words* actually mean? Is there is alterior motive to use such a word count?
- He didn't explicitly say he disagreed.....maybe this has an underhand meaing attached to it?
- He questioned it, instead of suggesting it was pap from the outset.
- If he questioned it, he could be just covering his tracks.
- Why did he question it? Does he need help understanding? If he didn't question it does that mean his mind is closed and needs to be pshyco-analysed?
- What is his response to the article? Should rates rise? Should they fall? Should small mammals be taught to do the tango? He doesn't say they shouldn't.....therefore he obviously does. We should report him for animal cruelty.

Only then can we draw some conclusions as to what I may, may not, have intended with this article.

*Probably wrong, couldn't be arised counting, though feel free to latch on.

With posts like that, you wonder why people treat you the way they do and question what you put in your posts...

You don't help your case at all.

JonnyBravo

Graham_Devon wrote: »

- Did he make a gramatical or spelling error that can be picked up?

I like the irony of the spelling error in the word grammatical.
If only you'd followed up with an incorrect grammatical use of the word spelling it would have been a gem.

StevieJ

I see that Dev has just introduced his Bullsh1t Baffles technique

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

I see that Dev has just introduced his Bullsh1t Baffles technique

Just following post 4 my son, just following post 4.

Took me a while to catch up.

chucky

Sampong wrote: »

No because some would have us believe that the supply of money is infinite to service ever increasing rents.

Who are these "some" that would have us believe this?

RenovationMan

RenovationMan wrote: »

But we do know that the events that 'changed your viewpoint' DID happen....



So how can you make the above statement and do anything but admit you were wrong by calling for a rate rise and admit that there was no 'window'?

In relation to your response to jonee's post. How would raising rates while 'the window was available' helped him in his situation? How would you say that low rates Jonee is any way a 'way of life' and not a 'lifeline'?

No response. Typical. :cool:

Going4TheDream

RenovationMan wrote: »

No response. Typical. :cool:

Probably got bored at the banal arguments - bit like the rest of us

Jonee

oh my word....what responses.....anyway, got paid today.....(hooray)...managed to get three hours overtime and got an extra £18.....can breathe a bit next week now....