If you're EVER going to buy a house, you'd better do it before April - here's why.

statex

Mostly scaremongering. The few people who have enough in their pot to buy a house or several will probably invest it abroad to avoid inheritance tax and CGT. Renting a house is total hassle . A friend let his flat,whilst working abroad, the DHSS tenant did not pay the rent and it cost him more than he received in rent to get her out.

padington

the_flying_pig wrote: »

what rot.

London is just too big to be the home of the super-rich in even nearly the same way.

Total guff ...

http://www.propertywire.com/news/europe/central-london-monaco-property-201409299636.html

padington

the_flying_pig wrote: »

if even half all of that happened [particularly videoconferencing that's genuinely comparable with meeting face to face - which BTW I believe is a very long time off] then imo it'd be the death knell for paying stupid prices for sketchy outer London crashpads in order to brave the tube into central London every day. there'd simply be no need for all of the UK that's looking to do highly-paid work to bunch together in & around London. why not live by the sea, or in the Cotswalds, or, er, Harrogate or whatever?

I disagree, virtual reality will enhance cities , not detract from them. The joy will be using the technology and having guests from all over the world whilst experiencing it with lots of well connected real people also in the room. There will be nothing more depressing than sitting in the Cotswold and going to a party where everyone else is effectively a ghost and in reality you are wondering around your house on you own like a weirdo talking to yourself. This technology won't stop people wanting to be close to real people. It will just add to the allready happening parties and work spaces to ensure everyone can attend. Everyone will still yearn to be where the critical mass of real people actually are.

fordcapri2000

mayonnaise wrote: »

IMO this is going to have a massive impact on the housing market.
Not just those thinking about going into BTL, but BOMAD will also get a nice boost.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/youre-ever-going-buy-house-5230599



Thoughts?

I just had to take a look at this thread, it is the sort of c**p I was certain 24hr c**p dispenser wotsthat or chucknorris would come out with.

Of course the new pension rules will divert more money to property, that's more or less why they are doing it, yet more damage being done by diverting yet more to one sector of our economy. But enough of that, most posters on here are too pig headed and suffering from selective hearing to even accept the problems the endless schemes such as this, RTB, HTB 1 & 2, historical low rates to name but a few are going to one day have.

No, the real D day moment here is not another sleight of hand scheme where more debt is thrown at the problem rather than actual houses, the event is the general election the following month. Since 1979 the UK has basically had strong government love or hate whatever government was in power. John Major wobbled a bit with a small majority, and the Cameron Clegg government government could have been the start of an unstable UK, but Clegg rolling over and showing his belly to Cameron for the past 5 years gave us yet more stabilty, though Clegg will never get the credit for doing so.

This coming election has all the hallmarks of being the start of an unstable weak governing UK with so many people having a complete hate for the two once main parties. I would suggest to anyone wanting to know what could happen to the UK with bad governments look not only at countries such as Greece or Italy, but to open the history books an read about the Wilson, Heath and winter of discontent era, basically read about the 1960's up until the 80's.

The only reason the UK is not in the same bed as countries like Greece now is the fact the UK has a good record of strong government, it is why our credit rating is so good. If we wake up one morning with a Labour and SNP government for example, just watch what happens to the UK.

chucknorris

fordcapri2000 wrote: »

I just had to take a look at this thread, it is the sort of c**p I was certain 24hr c**p dispenser wotsthat or chucknorris would come out with.

Try and keep up, I posted the following on this very thread!

chucknorris wrote: »

Additionally you can't just compare the returns, you also have to consider the illiquidity and the input required, obviously holding property is very illiquid and involves far more input than holding shares. I'm just about to invest in an all world high dividend ETF, I see it as a much better investment for me than buying more property:

http://www.morningstar.co.uk/uk/etf/snapshot/snapshot.aspx?id=0P0000YWPH

But then you are an idiot, so why should I expect more from you.

wotsthat

If you look at a graph of house prices over time you'd be hard pressed to point out the general election years without prior knowledge of when they happened.

However, whenever we get to a GE year it's always put forward as a game changer.

wotsthat

fordcapri2000 wrote: »

I just had to take a look at this thread, it is the sort of c**p I was certain 24hr c**p dispenser wotsthat or chucknorris would come out with.

I don't think it'll make much of a difference to be honest. To liquidate a pension to liberate a house sized sum is going to be so tax inefficient for most that only an idiot would do it. I suppose it might be something you'd consider though.

chucknorris

wotsthat wrote: »

I don't think it'll make much of a difference to be honest. To liquidate a pension to liberate a house sized sum is going to be so tax inefficient for most that only an idiot would do it. I suppose it might be something you'd consider though.

I have never ranted on about buying property. If he had a brain he would be dangerous, this is what he said to me previous to changing his id:


Well Chuck, I can only apologize again and hold my head in shame:embarasse, from now on I will have to take your posts a little more seriously.
Sadly I put you in the same basket as some of the other nutters on here, and I was wrong.


Post 22 on this thread: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/49043229#Comment_49043229

Jason74

chucknorris wrote: »

Try and keep up, I posted the following on this very thread!





But then you are an idiot, so why should I expect more from you.

He may well be an idiot (or not, I can't claim to know him well enough to have a view on that one, although mindless name calling of other posters never does anyone any favours imho), but that post does make a very good and important point about UK Government.

Looking at current polling, the current projections are not just for a hung parloament, they're predicting an outcome where short of a Labour / Tory coalition (which will never happen imho), it wont even be possible to form a viable coalition between two parties (see http://may2015.com/category/seat-calculator/ for a set of predictions from various sources all saying essentially the same thing).

In that situation, you're looking at a prolonged period of uncertainty imho, either from two (or perhaps even more more) elections within a year or two, or a prolonged weak Government always seen as likely to fall. That scenario isn't good news for anything economic imho, and I'm not just talking about house prices.

In practice, I suspect that probably wont happen. When it comes to polling day, a lot of people will see the risks associated with weak or unstable government, and reluctantly put their cross in the box of whetever "main" party they see as "least worst". That will probably result (sadly imho, although most on here will probably rejoice) in either a small Tory majority, or a continuation of the current coalition. But if current polls are right, we could be in for the kind of bumpy ride that makes measures like pension reform trivial by comparison.

Voyager2002

fordcapri2000 wrote: »

No, the real D day moment here is not another sleight of hand scheme where more debt is thrown at the problem rather than actual houses, the event is the general election the following month. Since 1979 the UK has basically had strong government love or hate whatever government was in power. John Major wobbled a bit with a small majority, and the Cameron Clegg government government could have been the start of an unstable UK, but Clegg rolling over and showing his belly to Cameron for the past 5 years gave us yet more stabilty, though Clegg will never get the credit for doing so.

This coming election has all the hallmarks of being the start of an unstable weak governing UK with so many people having a complete hate for the two once main parties. I would suggest to anyone wanting to know what could happen to the UK with bad governments look not only at countries such as Greece or Italy, but to open the history books an read about the Wilson, Heath and winter of discontent era, basically read about the 1960's up until the 80's.

The only reason the UK is not in the same bed as countries like Greece now is the fact the UK has a good record of strong government, it is why our credit rating is so good. If we wake up one morning with a Labour and SNP government for example, just watch what happens to the UK.

I do agree that the next election is important, but otherwise there is a great deal wrong with your analysis...

Strong government: Russia has a very strong government at the moment, and a disastrous economy. Germany, OTOH, has a history of weak central government while far more power is devolved to local and regional assemblies, and has an economy that has consistently performed, and delivered for the population as a whole, in a way that we can only dream about.

I can remember bits of the 1960s and the 1970s, and in lots of ways things were so much better then than they are today. Profits for the super-rich were a good deal lower then than now, but public services were generally effective and on the whole the country really worked in a way that is not the case today in the UK (although it is in Germany and Switzerland).

The reason for the problems in Greece and Italy? Not just coalition government (before the war Italy had an extremely strong government) but the fact that no-one had the cojones to tackle organised crime and institutional corruption. In the case of Italy the continuing power and political influence of the !!!!! is terrifying, and that factor alone is enough to explain the economic disaster there. In contrast, in the UK in the Victorian period there was a very determined effort to combat corruption, and we are still reaping the benefits.