UKIP - We will not aspire to restrict the rate at which house prices and rents rise

mystic_trev

chewmylegoff wrote: »

Hope your sister's spare room is comfortable...

I expect she says to him UKIP in the spare room.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You seem to be implying something here about BTL owners?

Yes. Shock news! They'd prefer the value of their property portfolios to rise rather than fall.

I fear UKIP aren't the natural home for people hoping prices will crash.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Yes. Shock news! They'd prefer the value of their property portfolios to rise rather than fall.

I fear UKIP aren't the natural home for people hoping prices will crash.

Good to see you have now accepted this instead of hiding behind the "it's all about the yield" line.

Also good to see you have accepted props. Up until this point you'd argued they werent props at all.

Good to see you have admitted BTL's like taxpayer props too.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Good to see you have now accepted this instead of hiding behind the "it's all about the yield" line.

I've never been "it's all about the yield". If I was a BTL investor I'd want to make sure the business was profitable without capital gain but would I welcome some gain - you bet. Can you see the difference between wanting capital gain and needing it?

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Also good to see you have accepted props. Up until this point you'd argued they werent props at all.

Good to see you have admitted BTL's like taxpayer props too.

Nah I'm just pulling your leg because you must be in a butcher's muddle about your party of choice.

I'm still calling them 'props' as opposed to props - I've already said what the biggest prop is - buyers and sellers coming to agreement on price irrespective of your disapproval.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Nah I'm just pulling your leg because you must be in a butcher's muddle about your party of choice.

How? Is UKIP my party of choice? I don't believe it is at the moment, though I'm open to voting for them.

And as I've said...what's so special that UKIP have said this? ALL the parties have the same line on this one.

Why is it suddenly a big deal that UKIP would do the same as every other party?

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

How? Is UKIP my party of choice? I don't believe it is at the moment, though I'm open to voting for them.

You said you would have voted for them if they'd put up a candidate at the local elections. That and your sensitivity to any criticism of UKIP made me think you were a big fan.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

And as I've said...what's so special that UKIP have said this? ALL the parties have the same line on this one.

I don't think the other parties are quite so overtly saying that they intend to keep house prices high - it's a cynical ploy to appeal to tories.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

You said you would have voted for them if they'd put up a candidate at the local elections.

You really need to learn to read.

I got accused of voting for UKIP. I stated even if I wanted to, I couldn't.

I didn't say what you imply (which is no real shock really is it, as lying to create something you can disagree with appears to be one of your best "debating" tactics).

wotsthat wrote: »

I don't think the other parties are quite so overtly saying that they intend to keep house prices high - it's a cynical ploy to appeal to tories.

Neither have UKIP. As I said. Read. As aI said. Lies.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You really need to learn to read.

I got accused of voting for UKIP. I stated even if I wanted to, I couldn't.

Which is why I said...

You said you would have voted for them if they'd put up a candidate at the local elections. That's not a lie is it?
Neither have UKIP. As I said. Read. As aI said. Lies.[/QUOTE]

The UKIP message on house prices is as clear as day - they support high house prices.

If a conservative or labour representative (and was a BTL owner) you would have made exactly the same interpretation but, oh no, not when it's your beloved UKIP.

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Which is why I said...

You said you would have voted for them if they'd put up a candidate at the local elections. That's not a lie is it?

As I said...I didn't say that at all.

I'll say it again, as you seem utterly confused. On being accused of voting UKIP, I stated "even if I wanted to, I couldn't".

The "even if" is the key here. It doesn't say "I wanted to, but couldn't". It doesn't say "I would, if I ccould have".

So yes, you are lying...again. Wasn't you who accused me of voting for them was it?

You really are here to argue absolutely everything, aren't you!

GhIFA

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As I said...I didn't say that at all.

I'll say it again, as you seem utterly confused. On being accused of voting UKIP, I stated "even if I wanted to, I couldn't".

The "even if" is the key here. It doesn't say "I wanted to, but couldn't". It doesn't say "I would, if I ccould have".

Except that is pretty much what you said though, isn't it.........

Well I didn't have the choice to vote UKIP in my area. Therefore I saw no reason to vote. I didn't like any of the rest.