Thatcher Dies

[Manwell Pablo]

Is the Leicester forum still alive? I've sought refuge in here and can't bring myself to go back.

I'm not going back until we win a game. It's not a pleasent place to spend your working day at the minute.

[Babylon]

I'm not going back until we win a game. It's not a pleasent place to spend your working day at the minute.

The fact a horrible thread about Thatcher seems a better option says it all.

[leicsmac]

Their own life decisions and poor money management and easy credit culture are as much to blame for many.

My mrs is on minimum wage, I'm certainly not particularly well paid but we both managed to save a deposit and will be mortgage free by the time we're 40 at the latest. Clearly some other issues dictate whether people can do that or not, but I know people earning almost double what I do who are up to their necks in debt, have barely paid a penny off their house. I listen to them whinge about having no money and find it baffling, earning what they did I'd probably already be mortgage free and certainly not in huge amounts of debt.

Interesting stuff Babs. I'm guessing a lot does come down to circumstance, but I still do think the prices are being kept artificially high by those who view bricks and mortar as an investment.

The three I mentioned increase demand. Cheaper borrowing means you can spend more so pushes prices up, likewise two incomes. Immigration means more demand as well. If supply is constrained by planning rules/ shortage of land and lack of investment then prices will go up.

Like any other commodity then. More investment/building clearly required.

Solution: Let's all go South Korean and live in massive apartments to conserve space!

(Actually most of them are as big in area as some houses here. Just upward, not outward.)

If you're earning more than average you shouldn't have a problem. Government is introducing new measures to bring required deposits down as well.

Well, we'll see. I hope you're right.

[The Doctor]

I don't know whether this is a rhetorical or a straightforward question.

Assuming the latter...

From memory of living through it and without checking sources:

- Most of the statements are completely accurate: police used as army; anti-homosexuality; anti-feminism; flirting with racism; corporate tax breaks; supported Saddam; opposed Mandela (a "terrorist"); stopped school milk; praised Pinochet; inequality rose; 1000s in poverty; Care in the Community; Hillsborough cover-up; Falklands deaths; poll tax inverse redistribution etc.

- 1 or 2 are a bit slanted: utility sell-offs did mainly benefit private companies, but members of the public bought shares too (though many sold them on to make a quick buck); a lot of council housing ended up in the hands of private landlords, but mainly indirectly, most were sold to tenants initially, I think.

- Pretty sure the one re. Suharto is right, too; DK re. Khmer Rouge

That one is right - the Khmer Rouge were backed by the UK and Thatcher sent out the SAS to train them while they were working on the massacre - going as far as to give them psychological training on how to do so.

[ADK]

Governments always like house prices to rise because it gets them votes.

Selling off the social housing has hurt the country though.

[Babylon]

Interesting stuff Babs. I'm guessing a lot does come down to circumstance, but I still do think the prices are being kept artificially high by those who view bricks and mortar as an investment.

The rise in buy to let over the last decade obviously keeps houses off the market helping to keep demand and prices high. Factor in that people then have to rent because they can't buy, meaning rent goes up and that makes buy to let look even more attractive. Bit of a vicious circle at the minute. Unfortunately I may well add to that circle in another 6/7 years when my mortgage is gone.

[Alf Bentley]

I'm not sure you could have predicted the overall increase in house prices, or could blame it on the right to buy scheme.

If it was sold as freeing up cash for reinvestment then I can see that could now be seen as not what happened. I wonder though if the critics include housing association investment in their stats.

A lot of factors have led to the increase in house prices, not least rise in cheaper mortgages, two income households and increased demand from immigration.

I think you're broadly correct here, Jon. Logically, in the short-term, selling off council houses would increase supply and reduce prices. The problem was the failure to replace that council house stock, as a lot of people cannot afford to buy a house either temporarily or permanently. This left them hanging on the mercies of private landlords (and Thatcher also slashed the secure tenancy rights of private tenants), often landlords who bought up council houses from their original tenants-cum-owners....raising both rents and demand for housing stock (for buy-to-let profiteering).

The factors that you've mentioned (2-income households, immigration & easier - rather than cheaper - mortgages) do partly explain the housing bubble, just as the difficulty getting mortgages since the banking crash dragged prices down a bit. Part is also explained by the mid/late-80s "Lawson boom", which put vast amounts of cash in the hands of the "Loadsamoney" generation, sending prices through the roof (and leading to the early 90s recession, but that's another story).

Plus, Thatcher effectively prevented councils from reinvesting funds in new housing stock, as Wikipedia points out:

"The sale price of a council house was based on its market valuation but also included a discount to reflect the rents paid by tenants and also to encourage take-up. The legislation gave council tenants the right to buy their council house at a discounted value, depending on how long they had been living in the house, with the proviso that if they sold their house before a minimum period had expired they would have to pay back a proportion of the discount. The sales were an attractive deal for tenants and hundreds of thousands of homes were sold. The policy is regarded as one of the major points of Thatcherism.^[3]

Proceeds of the sales were paid to the local authorities, but they were restricted to spending the money to reduce their debt until it was cleared, rather than being able to spend it on building more homes. The effect was to reduce the council housing stock, especially in areas where property prices were high such as London and the south-east of England.

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Buy#Criticisms

[ADK]

If i were in government i'd make it alot less attractive to be a private landlord, in fact ideally we'd have state owned housing available for everyone.

[leicsmac]

The rise in buy to let over the last decade obviously keeps houses off the market helping to keep demand and prices high. Factor in that people then have to rent because they can't buy, meaning rent goes up and that makes buy to let look even more attractive. Bit of a vicious circle at the minute. Unfortunately I may well add to that circle in another 6/7 years when my mortgage is gone.

You barsteward, keeping me out the housing market.

Agree with everything you've said there. I can see why buying to let is a really attractive position for rich folks right now, but by doing so they are contributing to the problem.

[Guest MattP]

Or an all time high. I feel quite vindicated. I've long suggested that most of the lefties on here are hypocritical scum whose only legitimate reason for being a lefty is that it gives them someone to blame for the fact that they have never achieved anything. This thread is proof. Some absolutely disgusting comments on here from people who, laughably, consider themselves morally superior.

And the JUSTIFICATIONS... cor fooking blimey. Some juicy shit. BRB omgz i just scraped my hand on a TISSUE OMGODZ my suffering is ON A PAR with being STARVED TO DEATH IN A CONCENTRATION CAMP therefore my kids should feel entitled to HATE TISSUES just as much as other kids can hate Adolf fooking Hotler. Honestly, you couldn't make this shit up.

Lefties, be ashamed. You have been outed. We know what you really are.

100% Correct.

They can never take the moral highground again.

[leicsmac]

100% Correct.

They can never take the moral highground again.

Depends on the person. No need to generalise.

From what I can tell both lefties and righties can be as nasty as each other given the opportunity. But there's decent folks on both sides too.

The difference I can see is that most right-wingers see material wealth as the basis of pretty much all success, whereas lefties tend to look to life experiences and the immaterial for their success.

[Babylon]

whereas lefties tend to look to life experiences

Like the experience of never using soap.

[purpleronnie]

Depends on the person. No need to generalise.

From what I can tell both lefties and righties can be as nasty as each other given the opportunity. But there's decent folks on both sides too.

The difference I can see is that most right-wingers see material wealth as the basis of pretty much all success, whereas lefties tend to look to life experiences and the immaterial for their success.

I would assume matt didn't mean all lefties, just those who want to celebrate her death.

[ADK]

I'm sceptical of anyone who refers to themselves as left or right wing.

[Guest MattP]

I would assume matt didn't mean all lefties, just those who want to celebrate her death.

Aye, I was referring to some certain people on here.

[Finnegan]

100% Correct.

They can never take the moral highground again.

... What? Because of a few Large Als? Don't be a nob, Matt.

[Guest MattP]

... What? Because of a few Large Als? Don't be a nob, Matt.

See above.

Dont start using insults in your posts either, it doesn't suit you and you are far better than that.

[leicsmac]

Like the experience of never using soap.

Oi. I shower every day!

(But then I consider myself centrist).

I'm sceptical of anyone who refers to themselves as left or right wing.

Yeah, smacks of absolutism to me. It's too complicated an issue to pigeonhole in that way.

Aye, I was referring to some certain people on here.

I think perhaps you needed to make that more obvious in your comment then? Easy for people to get the wrong end of the stick.

[Finnegan]

See above.

Dont start using insults in your posts either, it doesn't suit you and you are far better than that.

I feel you and I have been debating through this forum long enough that one of us can tell the other they're being a nob without it going down as mortal, personal insults.

[AdamN]

I'm sceptical of anyone who refers to themselves as left or right wing.

Very much so. Obviously most people will have leanings to one side or the other, but if you define all your beliefs by a single political ideology then you're clearly a bit of a bellend.

[Zingari]

See above.

Dont start using insults in your posts either, it doesn't suit you and you are far better than that.

you're about 25,000 posts too late to say that .

[Guest MattP]

That party will be 3pm Saturday.

I really hope you show the whole World what you are.

[Guest MattP]

I feel you and I have been debating through this forum long enough that one of us can tell the other they're being a nob without it going down as mortal, personal insults.

You're right, just dont want to see you ending up down the Daggers route.

[Zingari]

You're right, just dont want to see you ending up down the Daggers route.

more likely to end up going down on Daggers root !

[Guest MattP]