The true housing benefit scroungers

[Unbelievable Jeff]

What question? Oh, the one that requires me to subscribe to your world view in order to answer it?

 

I don't think we should have heavy substance abusers at all, and I wonder how the f**k they got there in the first place, or why they would get involved knowing the risks. Everyone has seen the before and after pictures; why would someone put themselves through that the first time, let alone time after time? Ultimately, that sort of self-destructive behaviour is a big f**k you to yourself, your family and society in general.

 

So yeah, I'd probably spend time and effort preventing it from happening in the first place, get treatment for those that were on it and while that was all being sorted out, house young families in new social housing build that's tied to the same sort of responsible behaviour you need to get a mortgage.

 

It is Ok to say "I don't know", you know? No-one will think any worse of you.

 

Personally, the best way to regenerate an area is to get money into an area. A good way to get money into an area is to get working people with a wage into it. The run up of rent prices may well see an indirect regeneration effect on run down areas as those with a lack of money but a need to live there move there (see what has happened in Peckham, Mile End, Brixton etc, and to a greater degree Clapham).

[pap]

What you're talking about is gentrification. Don't worry; it's well underway.

 

Instead of addressing the universal problems with the cost of housing, the Tories went the other way and decided that they wouldn't pay HB for expensive properties (+£400pw). London will soon be a city for the rich, and as btf pointed out, cities need people to run them. Where would you house the lower-paid?

 

Tent cities? Below stairs, perhaps?

[saintfully]

Just for the record Unbelievable Jeff, I also think people who choose to become part of the scummy landlord culture must be without morals, imagination, empathy or any kind of soul.

 

Just so your aware like, nothing personal.

 

It's business innit.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

What you're talking about is gentrification. Don't worry; it's well underway.

 

Instead of addressing the universal problems with the cost of housing, the Tories went the other way and decided that they wouldn't pay HB for expensive properties (+£400pw). London will soon be a city for the rich, and as btf pointed out, cities need people to run them. Where would you house the lower-paid?

 

Tent cities? Below stairs, perhaps?

 

It's as if you haven't read any of this thread whatsoever.

 

 

I am well aware it's gentrification, considering your grasp of economics on the rest of the thread I assumed you weren't aware of it.

 

For a start, if the jobs are needed, then the market would cater for this, with higher wages being paid to ensure that the job can be done. Secondly, there is decent enough transport links from lower cost towns and cities that mean that they can travel in.

[Sour Mash]

Just for the record Unbelievable Jeff, I also think people who choose to become part of the scummy landlord culture must be without morals, imagination, empathy or any kind of soul.

 

Just so your aware like, nothing personal.

 

It's business innit.

You think that anyone that is a landlord is scum etc?

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Just for the record Unbelievable Jeff, I also think people who choose to become part of the scummy landlord culture must be without morals, imagination, empathy or any kind of soul.

 

Just so your aware like, nothing personal.

 

It's business innit.

 

I joined it so I could provide my children with properties when they are older, not for the paltry gains now (after tax I make about £900 a month on 3 properties, and probably spend around 20 hours a month dealing with and maintaining them). But thanks for your concern.

[pap]

I joined it so I could provide my children with properties when they are older, not for the paltry gains now (after tax I make about £900 a month on 3 properties, and probably spend around 20 hours a month dealing with and maintaining them). But thanks for your concern.

 

See that Ivan Drago?

 

 

That's you, that is.

[Jonnyboy]

I joined it so I could provide my children with properties when they are older, not for the paltry gains now (after tax I make about £900 a month on 3 properties, and probably spend around 20 hours a month dealing with and maintaining them). But thanks for your concern.

 

Nice work if you can get it.

[melmacian_saint]

Going round in circles here - if market forces drive rents up so very high then people like shop workers, hospital staff, bus drivers and even teachers can't afford to live there and, if they all follow UJ's suggestion, they'll all move out to cheaper areas. Who will then run the essential services in London (or even other big UK cities like Oxford)?

 

Not sure that 'half the world' wants to live in London (I did live there once and I wouldn't go back there for all the tea in China) - it's interesting to see how other capital cities manage the situation so much better than the UK does.

 

I doubt any other capital city faces the demand and attraction that London does. Even looking across the pond, not a capital but I don't think NY faces the sort of pressure (undoubtedly because of the large areas for expansion around it) that London does.

 

As much as people in this country fail to realize, London is truly the capital of the world. And receives attention accordingly.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Nice work if you can get it.

 

Yeah, but I'm not making tons of money off it.

Edited 27 February, 2014 by Unbelievable Jeff

[Unbelievable Jeff]

See that Ivan Drago?

 

 

That's you, that is.

 

And I expect you have no provisions to help your daughters out as you give all the money you save to the poor.

 

Your lack of self-awareness is startling!

[pap]

And I expect you have no provisions to help your daughters out as you give all the money you save to the poor.

 

Your lack of self-awareness is startling!

 

My daughters are well-provided for. Fortunately, the pair of them were born smart; I've spent the best part of 19 years ensuring that they prize and use their intelligence. There is going to be 25 year overlap where we are all working. They can have whatever I own when I'm gone, but I'm not going to support them while they are perfectly capable of looking after themselves. I'd be utterly disappointed with them if their only source of income was housing benefit cheques, especially if it were from a grubby property empire I'd built on the backs of the poor and other taxpayers.

 

The most important provision you can give to your kids is an environment that fosters independence and the ability to stand on their own feet. These lessons seem to be holding; Juvenile Unit #1 was offered free money throughout her A-Levels to allow her maximum study time. She got a part-time job instead, and loves the fact that she's financially independent; she'll likely keep it throughout Uni. Sometimes I'm in awe of the way the pair of them just get on with sh!t.

 

So yep; provisions have been made. They're just different provisions, ones that don't require keeping anyone down for my kids to make their way up.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Just for the record Unbelievable Jeff, I also think people who choose to become part of the scummy landlord culture must be without morals, imagination, empathy or any kind of soul.

 

Just so your aware like, nothing personal.

 

It's business innit.

 

Our next door neighbour (a teacher BTW) got a job in Germany. It is a 3 year contract, so decided not to sell up, but rent out their house as they want to live round here on their return. The people who moved in, love the house and told me that they couldn't believe their luck that this became available to rent. I don't know why they rent, I didn't ask them. But she doesn't work and he drives a BMW, so presume they could afford to buy.

 

Just to add, after mortgage payments , estate agents fees for managing the property and paying rent on his place in Germany, he still comes out with a profit.

 

Is my neighbour a "scummy landlord with no soul" ?

[Unbelievable Jeff]

My daughters are well-provided for. Fortunately, the pair of them were born smart; I've spent the best part of 19 years ensuring that they prize and use their intelligence. There is going to be 25 year overlap where we are all working. They can have whatever I own when I'm gone, but I'm not going to support them while they are perfectly capable of looking after themselves. I'd be utterly disappointed with them if their only source of income was housing benefit cheques, especially if it were from a grubby property empire I'd built on the backs of the poor and other taxpayers.

 

The most important provision you can give to your kids is an environment that fosters independence and the ability to stand on their own feet. These lessons seem to be holding; Juvenile Unit #1 was offered free money throughout her A-Levels to allow her maximum study time. She got a part-time job instead, and loves the fact that she's financially independent; she'll likely keep it throughout Uni. Sometimes I'm in awe of the way the pair of them just get on with sh!t.

 

So yep; provisions have been made. They're just different provisions, ones that don't require keeping anyone down for my kids to make their way up.

 

I think you're making the assumption that those I rent to can't afford to buy? Considering 2 of my flats are rented to people who need a home-away-from-home, and the 3rd to someone who is not interested in buying (or paying rent every month to be honest) I don't think I have anything to worry about.

[pap]

I think you're making the assumption that those I rent to can't afford to buy? Considering 2 of my flats are rented to people who need a home-away-from-home, and the 3rd to someone who is not interested in buying (or paying rent every month to be honest) I don't think I have anything to worry about.

 

No, I'm referring to your earlier comment when you said you've no problem making money from benefit claimants.

 

Personally, I think you're making a big mistake. I went to a former polytechnic. You couldn't move for unmotivated middle-class kids who'd had everything handed to them on a plate. No hunger, y'see. The ones that didn't drop out finished with low grades, a couple even without honours. I was really surprised at the time; Uni is supposed to be a place where people want to be, right? Not with these people. It was just something they did to avoid having to go to work.

 

Most of them have LinkedIn profiles that could feasibly be ascribed to plankton. Good luck with that provision, yeah?

[Special K]

Land prices in this Country is a given to make money.

 

No it isn't. It has potential if it has the right planning consent and when i look at developers i know turning away from 18 out of 20 sites they view, it is hardly a "given".

[pap]

Our next door neighbour (a teacher BTW) got a job in Germany. It is a 3 year contract, so decided not to sell up, but rent out their house as they want to live round here on their return. The people who moved in, love the house and told me that they couldn't believe their luck that this became available to rent. I don't know why they rent, I didn't ask them. But she doesn't work and he drives a BMW, so presume they could afford to buy.

 

Just to add, after mortgage payments , estate agents fees for managing the property and paying rent on his place in Germany, he still comes out with a profit.

 

Is my neighbour a "scummy landlord with no soul" ?

 

Not according to this provision.

 

I've got no problem with someone renting one house out if circumstances take them elsewhere. People who farm benefit claimants can f**k right off.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

No, I'm referring to your earlier comment when you said you've no problem making money from benefit claimants.

 

Personally, I think you're making a big mistake. I went to a former polytechnic. You couldn't move for unmotivated middle-class kids who'd had everything handed to them on a plate. No hunger, y'see. The ones that didn't drop out finished with low grades, a couple even without honours. I was really surprised at the time; Uni is supposed to be a place where people want to be, right? Not with these people. It was just something they did to avoid having to go to work.

 

Most of them have LinkedIn profiles that could feasibly be ascribed to plankton. Good luck with that provision, yeah?

 

If you hold such contempt for them, why are you linked-in to them. Seems a bit strange.

 

I'm also surprised you subscribe to the thought that people should go to University, I would have thought you'd see it as elitist.

 

I don't have a problem with offering the government help in relation to finding affordable social housing for those that can't afford it. Don't forget that if I did that I would lose around 25% of the revenue from the flat. What should I do, just leave it empty, whilst the Government searches for social housing that successive governments have failed to build? Surely that is more morally contemptible.

 

So what should my next move be Pap, to wipe my social and moral conscience clean? Consider that I want to keep 2 to give to my kids and the 3rd to use the rental income for a pension for my other half when the time comes (her company has only just started doing pensions with the new legislation that's come in y'see)?

[pap]

If you hold such contempt for them, why are you linked-in to them. Seems a bit strange.

 

I'm also surprised you subscribe to the thought that people should go to University, I would have thought you'd see it as elitist.

 

I don't have a problem with offering the government help in relation to finding affordable social housing for those that can't afford it. Don't forget that if I did that I would lose around 25% of the revenue from the flat. What should I do, just leave it empty, whilst the Government searches for social housing that successive governments have failed to build? Surely that is more morally contemptible.

 

So what should my next move be Pap, to wipe my social and moral conscience clean? Consider that I want to keep 2 to give to my kids and the 3rd to use the rental income for a pension for my other half when the time comes (her company has only just started doing pensions with the new legislation that's come in y'see)?

 

Keep 'em coming, Jeff. This is a superb fantasy you're constructing here. I feel you're only a couple of hobbits and goblins away from a sweeping epic saga.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Keep 'em coming, Jeff. This is a superb fantasy you're constructing here. I feel you're only a couple of hobbits and goblins away from a sweeping epic saga.

 

Wow, you really like dodging questions don't you?

[pap]

Wow, you really like dodging questions don't you?

 

Nah, it's not that skip. I'm not going to validate your squirming self-justification by providing any "answers".

 

You must do what you think is best, of course.

[buctootim]

Bit pointless making flaws in national policy into a personalised ding dong imo.

 

It basically boils down to the fact that once you've got a house its easier and cheaper for you to get a second mortgage for a buy to let than it is for a younger person struggling to get the deposit for their first place. BTL was a tiny part of the market 20 years ago and now literally millions of people are using housing as an investment. Its distorting the market - driving up prices and reducing access, home ownership is now falling substantially.

 

You cant blame individuals for what is for them a logical decision. The government should be addressing the supply of housing - reducing prices and increasing availability instead of using public money to fuel a bidding war for the inadequate number of properties on the market. Increase supply = cheaper houses + higher standard of living + labour mobility + lower benefits bill. Its moronic the problem hasnt been addressed by either Labour or the Tories.

Edited 27 February, 2014 by buctootim

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Nah, it's not that skip. I'm not going to validate your squirming self-justification by providing any "answers".

 

You must do what you think is best, of course.

 

Haha, yeah, nice one. All the righteous condemnation, none of the answers. You're just like Red Ken...

[pap]

Haha, yeah, nice one. All the righteous condemnation, none of the answers. You're just like Red Ken...

 

As Tim points out, a ding-dong between you and I probably isn't going to improve this thread.

 

FWIW though, I've already suggested loads of alternatives on this thread, as have others.

[Clapham Saint]

Bit pointless making flaws in national policy into a personalised ding dong imo.

 

It basically boils down to the fact that once you've got a house its easier and cheaper for you to get a second mortgage for a buy to let than it is for a younger person struggling to get the deposit for their first place. BTL was a tiny part of the market 20 years ago and now literally millions of people are using housing as an investment. Its distorting the market - driving up prices and reducing access, home ownership is now falling substantially.

 

You cant blame individuals for what is for them a logical decision. The government should be addressing the supply of housing - reducing prices and increasing availability instead of using public money to fuel a bidding war for the inadequate number of properties on the market. Increase supply = cheaper houses + higher standard of living + labour mobility + lower benefits bill. Its moronic the problem hasnt been addressed by either Labour or the Tories.

 

Agree wholeheartedly with this.

 

The cost of housing (both to rent and to purchase) has become ridiculously high and needs to be addressed. People (and politicians) can come up with as many quick fix schemes as they like, however the only option that will deal with the problem long term is to build more houses. It used to be the case that political parties went into election campaigns pledging to build X number of new homes. Sadly all recent governments have neglected this and the younger generations in particular are now paying the price.

 

The current situation is lose/lose. It isn't fair on tax payers struggling to fund their own accommodation that they also have to fork out via taxes to house those on benefits but then what is the alternative? Kick everybody on benefits out of London and make them live in tents in Southsea?

 

As for the original post and the Mirror article... is another way of looking at it that a number of conservative politicians are looking to reduce housing benefit payments for the benefit of the tax payer as a whole - despite the negative impact that such a reduction will have on their personal incomes?

 

Its just a shame that nobody is proposing to bring the benefit bill down by implementing a long term policy to arrest/reduce the rise on housing costs as a whole and that short term fudges which won't actually help anybody are the order of the day.

[bridge too far]

I firmly believe that one answer is to radically increase the amount of new build whether for purchase or rent.

 

However, if consequential market forces meant the value of property dropped, many voters would be very unhappy (although a property's price is only relevant to the next property you're proposing to purchase). Some people get orgasmic about the increase in the value of their houses.

[Jonnyboy]

If you hold such contempt for them, why are you linked-in to them. Seems a bit strange.

 

I'm also surprised you subscribe to the thought that people should go to University, I would have thought you'd see it as elitist.

 

I don't have a problem with offering the government help in relation to finding affordable social housing for those that can't afford it. Don't forget that if I did that I would lose around 25% of the revenue from the flat. What should I do, just leave it empty, whilst the Government searches for social housing that successive governments have failed to build? Surely that is more morally contemptible.

 

So what should my next move be Pap, to wipe my social and moral conscience clean? Consider that I want to keep 2 to give to my kids and the 3rd to use the rental income for a pension for my other half when the time comes (her company has only just started doing pensions with the new legislation that's come in y'see)?

 

#spoiledkids

[saintfully]

Our next door neighbour (a teacher BTW) got a job in Germany. It is a 3 year contract, so decided not to sell up, but rent out their house as they want to live round here on their return. The people who moved in, love the house and told me that they couldn't believe their luck that this became available to rent. I don't know why they rent, I didn't ask them. But she doesn't work and he drives a BMW, so presume they could afford to buy.

 

Just to add, after mortgage payments , estate agents fees for managing the property and paying rent on his place in Germany, he still comes out with a profit.

 

Is my neighbour a "scummy landlord with no soul" ?

 

Doh... obviously a difference between:

a) someone renting out their home because they're moving abroad and want to return to their home at the end of a contract,

and

b) some spineless goblin, free of imagination or spirit, who thinks its okay to have 3 BTL flats he'll never sleep in and leech off people whose incomes aren't high enough to enable them to save for a deposit.

 

Also,

 

Re. 'she doesn't work and he drives a BMW so can obviously afford to buy'. If you can't see the flaw in your thinking, Im afraid I'm unlikely to be able to help you.

[NI Saint]

Kick everybody on benefits out of London and make them live in tents in Southsea?

 

Surely you mean caravan?

[Sour Mash]

I firmly believe that one answer is to radically increase the amount of new build whether for purchase or rent.

And people are surprised we've got a housing shortage http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/27/net-migration-uk-jumps-30-percent

[Jonnyboy]

"Spineless goblin" lol

[Unbelievable Jeff]

#spoiledkids

 

Don't you dare talk about my ****ing kids, pr!ck.

[hypochondriac]

Don't you dare talk about my ****ing kids, pr!ck.

 

[pap]

Don't you dare talk about my ****ing kids, pr!ck.

 

Then don't use them as pawns in your argument.

 

Besides, do you blame a spoiled kid for being a spoiled kid?

 

Course not. You blame the parents.

 

No-one is knocking your kids; it's not even clear that Jonnyboy was talking about them. The same post referenced workshy university students.

[Clapham Saint]

If you hold such contempt for them, why are you linked-in to them. Seems a bit strange.

 

I'm also surprised you subscribe to the thought that people should go to University, I would have thought you'd see it as elitist.

 

I don't have a problem with offering the government help in relation to finding affordable social housing for those that can't afford it. Don't forget that if I did that I would lose around 25% of the revenue from the flat. What should I do, just leave it empty, whilst the Government searches for social housing that successive governments have failed to build? Surely that is more morally contemptible.

 

So what should my next move be Pap, to wipe my social and moral conscience clean? Consider that I want to keep 2 to give to my kids and the 3rd to use the rental income for a pension for my other half when the time comes (her company has only just started doing pensions with the new legislation that's come in y'see)?

 

Hang on. Do you receive 25% more for letting to social housing tenants that you would be able to get on the private market?

 

Seems crazy that they are prepared to pay this premium if true or am I misunderstanding?

 

This may have been covered already in this thread but as a late joiner I haven't seen it.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Then don't use them as pawns in your argument.

 

Besides, do you blame a spoiled kid for being a spoiled kid?

 

Course not. You blame the parents.

 

No-one is knocking your kids; it's not even clear that Jonnyboy was talking about them. The same post referenced workshy university students.

 

Either way Pap, it's not right to talk about other peoples kids, and the provisions you make for them during your life. One of my kids works, the other is far too young to. I just want to give them their first step onto the property ladder, as it is becoming more and more difficult to buy in and around London (yes, this is another debate to have - closely linked to this one).

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Hang on. Do you receive 25% more for letting to social housing tenants that you would be able to get on the private market?

 

Seems crazy that they are prepared to pay this premium if true or am I misunderstanding?

 

This may have been covered already in this thread but as a late joiner I haven't seen it.

 

 

 

No, I would get 25% less renting to social than I would get on a private rent. I don't currently rent to social, I rent to private lets, but I may rent one of them out to social as there is a need in the area (Hounslow) and at least then I get a guaranteed income. Takes a lot of the stress away from it.

[pap]

Either way Pap, it's not right to talk about other peoples kids, and the provisions you make for them during your life. One of my kids works, the other is far too young to. I just want to give them their first step onto the property ladder, as it is becoming more and more difficult to buy in and around London (yes, this is another debate to have - closely linked to this one).

 

Everyone is someone else's kid. Does that make everyone above criticism?

 

You introduced your offspring into the argument as justification for your proposed benefit scrounging. There are plenty of other people on here with kids that won't accept that as a valid line of reasoning. No-one is ascribing any negative qualities to your kids with regard to their individual characteristics. People are simply pointing out the perils of giving your kids too much; that they can lack an appreciation for the value of money or hard work.

[Barry Sanchez]

Everyone is someone else's kid. Does that make everyone above criticism?

 

You introduced your offspring into the argument as justification for your proposed benefit scrounging. There are plenty of other people on here with kids that won't accept that as a valid line of reasoning. No-one is ascribing any negative qualities to your kids with regard to their individual characteristics. People are simply pointing out the perils of giving your kids too much; that they can lack an appreciation for the value of money or hard work.

 

Children should not be brought into an argument as a shield or a weapon, its low to use both to be honest. Anybody other than the person writing it is off limits for insults/smackdowns, I pretty much write on here as to what I would say to anyones face and it should be that way full stop, be a gent, a ****taker yes but not horrible.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Everyone is someone else's kid. Does that make everyone above criticism?

 

You introduced your offspring into the argument as justification for your proposed benefit scrounging. There are plenty of other people on here with kids that won't accept that as a valid line of reasoning. No-one is ascribing any negative qualities to your kids with regard to their individual characteristics. People are simply pointing out the perils of giving your kids too much; that they can lack an appreciation for the value of money or hard work.

 

But those would likely be qualities that are picked up earlier in life, not when they finish university.

 

And benefit scrounging? Seriously? Offering a property at a lower rent so those on benefits have a place to live. This is where we disagree massively.

[Tokyo-Saint]

Everyone is someone else's kid.

 

You obviously haven't heard of a little person called baby Jesus, have you Pap?

 

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Children should not be brought into an argument as a shield or a weapon, its low to use both to be honest. Anybody other than the person writing it is off limits for insults/smackdowns, I pretty much write on here as to what I would say to anyones face and it should be that way full stop, be a gent, a ****taker yes but not horrible.

 

I didn't really mean to use them as a shield, it was more around the fact that I want to keep the flats and not sell them, even if it is for that reason.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

You obviously haven't heard of a little person called baby Jesus, have you Pap?

 

 

Was he not Allah's son?

[pap]

But those would likely be qualities that are picked up earlier in life, not when they finish university.

 

I dunno. If you've passed down your indifferent attitude to the poor to them and give them a sh!tload of stuff when they're growing up too, then I could see it happening a lot earlier.

 

And benefit scrounging? Seriously? Offering a property at a lower rent so those on benefits have a place to live. This is where we disagree massively.

 

Yeah, seriously. You're getting a handout from the government, aren't you?

 

Collectively, the rates that private landlords charge keeps people out of work. You are not doing great work here, Unbelievable Jeff. You're keeping a home off the market and scrounging off the state. When you hand the kids the shiny new houses, be sure to let them know how many people you kept down so that they could get on.

[Tokyo-Saint]

Was he not Allah's son?

 

Is Allah 'someone'? Careful Sarb, you'll start a Jihad.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

I dunno. If you've passed down your indifferent attitude to the poor to them and give them a sh!tload of stuff when they're growing up too, then I could see it happening a lot earlier.

 

 

 

Yeah, seriously. You're getting a handout from the government, aren't you?

 

Collectively, the rates that private landlords charge keeps people out of work. You are not doing great work here, Unbelievable Jeff. You're keeping a home off the market and scrounging off the state. When you hand the kids the shiny new houses, be sure to let them know how many people you kept down so that they could get on.

 

I think we should just end it here. We're not going to agree on this area, so we'll just agree to disagree.

[Bearsy]

You obviously haven't heard of a little person called baby Jesus, have you Pap?

 

 

bj's dad give him a whole planet + he didn't turn out spoiled at all

 

DON'T YOU DARE TALK ABOUT MY FUCKING KIDS, PRICK!

[pap]

I think we should just end it here. We're not going to agree on this area, so we'll just agree to disagree.

 

This can't be news to you. I realised this pages ago.

 

Ultimately I'm a big believer in "do whatever the f*ck you like, as long as you don't screw anyone else over". Practically, that's almost impossible to achieve but you try, and there are certainly huge moral icebergs one can forever avoid simply by steering clear of certain careers, like not becoming a loan shark or bailiff, etc. It can be costly; I've turned stuff down for moral reasons and will continue to do so.

 

Deep down, you know it's easy money. With the panoply of full service letting agencies and service contractors on offer, all you really need is the deposit and credit rating. Thing is, easy money rarely comes without strings. One of the consequences of your choice is that people like me will disapprove.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

This can't be news to you. I realised this pages ago.

 

Ultimately I'm a big believer in "do whatever the f*ck you like, as long as you don't screw anyone else over". Practically, that's almost impossible to achieve but you try, and there are certainly huge moral icebergs one can forever avoid simply by steering clear of certain careers, like not becoming a loan shark or bailiff, etc. It can be costly; I've turned stuff down for moral reasons and will continue to do so.

 

Deep down, you know it's easy money. With the panoply of full service letting agencies and service contractors on offer, all you really need is the deposit and credit rating. Thing is, easy money rarely comes without strings. One of the consequences of your choice is that people like me will disapprove.

 

Fair enough, and I thinks that's just where we will end it. However I do think Bearsy makes a good point.

[Graffito]

I firmly believe that one answer is to radically increase the amount of new build whether for purchase or rent.

 

However, if consequential market forces meant the value of property dropped, many voters would be very unhappy (although a property's price is only relevant to the next property you're proposing to purchase). Some people get orgasmic about the increase in the value of their houses.

 

Correct. The problem is inadequate supply.