Why the bad news for landlords is just beginning

economic

westernpromise wrote: »

Not me.

1/ the patients
2/ the taxpayers

and that's it.

Mr BagofWind thinks im a very bad person for not caring about nurses and their supposive inability to afford to buy a decent london property in a decent area....

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn

economic wrote: »

Mr BagofWind thinks im a very bad person for not caring about nurses and their supposive inability to afford to buy a decent london property in a decent area....

They can't afford to buy a Bugatti Veyron either!!! this is getting ridiculous.....

Won't anyone think of these "Poor Damned Nurses"...... Surely no-one should be forced to rent a nice property in London!!

AG47

Good news for nurses in London and south east, rents are falling like a rock

westernpromise

People in certain jobs are apt to forget the benefits of being in them when it comes to the money. I have a relative who spent her 20s working in TV and who had a lovely time hobnobbing with celebs and hanging with a cool crowd of young media types at the Groucho Club. The fun quotient was high, the money was rubbish and decades later she's now poor as a churchmouse (TV is a sexist, ageist industry). She has completely forgotten the transient advantages of the jobs she used to have and is all about how unfair it is that others earn more.

Likewise your NHS worker gets to do immensely rewarding work, saving and improving lives and relieving suffering.

I have never hung out with celebs or done rewarding work. I've never left work having saved a life or having snogged Jet out of Gladiators. Instead I did a university course in which I had no particular interest at all because it was my best path into Oxbridge. I then parlayed my Oxbridge degree into a career in my 20s were spent slaving over bills of lading, letters of indemnity and demurrage calculations, and I then took 20 years more learning about my industry from the bottom up. At no point was I doing this for anything but the money. None of this was designed to be fun. Sometimes it was, but mostly it was just work.

Compared to the relative I mentioned, if I knocked a nought off the end of what I'm now on, I'd still be on more money than she is. The rewards have materialised as foreseen. I have responsibility for much, but not that much actual work if I am frank. If something needs doing and it's interesting, I do it. If it's boring I hand it off to one of the 18 younger versions of myself sitting outside my office. If I have to travel I go business class. Of course I'm still a salaried employee but I picked my industry well and early.

There were foresight and sacrifice involved in this and I get quite irritated by those who've displayed neither but who feel entitled to comparable rewards. People who have placed having a fun or worthwhile career ahead of decent money aren't entitled to moan about it now. They need to reflect on the non-economic benefits of their past choices and make do with a studio in Dalston.

westernpromise

AG47 wrote: »

Good news for nurses in London and south east, rents are falling like a rock

Not according to the ONS. See post 60 above.

economic

westernpromise wrote: »

People in certain jobs are apt to forget the benefits of being in them when it comes to the money. I have a relative who spent her 20s working in TV and who had a lovely time hobnobbing with celebs and hanging with a cool crowd of young media types at the Groucho Club. The fun quotient was high, the money was rubbish and decades later she's now poor as a churchmouse (TV is a sexist, ageist industry). She has completely forgotten the transient advantages of the jobs she used to have and is all about how unfair it is that others earn more.

Likewise your NHS worker gets to do immensely rewarding work, saving and improving lives and relieving suffering.

I have never hung out with celebs or done rewarding work. I've never left work having saved a life or having snogged Jet out of Gladiators. Instead I did a university course in which I had no particular interest at all because it was my best path into Oxbridge. I then parlayed my Oxbridge degree into a career in my 20s were spent slaving over bills of lading, letters of indemnity and demurrage calculations, and I then took 20 years more learning about my industry from the bottom up. At no point was I doing this for anything but the money. None of this was designed to be fun. Sometimes it was, but mostly it was just work.

Compared to the relative I mentioned, if I knocked a nought off the end of what I'm now on, I'd still be on more money than she is. The rewards have materialised as foreseen. I have responsibility for much, but not that much actual work if I am frank. If something needs doing and it's interesting, I do it. If it's boring I hand it off to one of the 18 younger versions of myself sitting outside my office. If I have to travel I go business class. Of course I'm still a salaried employee but I picked my industry well and early.

There were foresight and sacrifice involved in this and I get quite irritated by those who've displayed neither but who feel entitled to comparable rewards. People who have placed having a fun or worthwhile career ahead of decent money aren't entitled to moan about it now. They need to reflect on the non-economic benefits of their past choices and make do with a studio in Dalston.

nicely put. can i ask which industry you are in and/or what you do?

Windofchange

economic wrote: »

Mr BagofWind thinks im a very bad person for not caring about nurses and their supposive inability to afford to buy a decent london property in a decent area....

It's like your go to line hey. What's that, the fourth time now this week?

economic wrote: »

nursing is also a low skilled job

Just about sums up your ignorance perfectly, or we could get a real glimpse into your character with:

economic wrote: »

homeless people can find shelter. its usually their own fault they are homeless.

You're just a bad person fullstop regardless of your opinion on nurses.

Windofchange

Jack_Johnson_the_acorn wrote: »

...this is getting ridiculous.....

It certainly is - this all stems from me suggesting that an average worker should be able to afford more than the cheapest studio in a !!!!!hole of an area, and believe me, having spent 25 years in the vicinity it is. Have I suggested your average person be able to buy in Kensington? Buy a Bugatti? Don't let any of this stop you from winning the internet though hey champ!

AG47

westernpromise wrote: »

Not according to the ONS. See post 60 above.

Are you trying to deny that rents are actually falling in London and the south east?

Are you are perma prop bull?

westernpromise

Not me, chum. The ONS.