pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 That it is the Labour government that spent an excessive amount on conflicts, whereas this government has only supported Libyan air strikes? I think the Tories are trying to follow your plan to not spend money on conflicts that doesn't directly impact them... We'd have been supporting Syria had it not been voted out as an option. Miliband shouted it down. Can you stop this implicit Labour vs Tory nonsense, ta? I'm not a member of the Labour Party, haven't told anyone to vote for them and coincidentally enough, gave them a flat no today when they asked if I'd like to campaign for them. I protested them during the '00s, just as I've protested the Tories and the BBC during this Parliament. I've actually protested Labour actions more, so I don't need you to contextualise my thoughts on conflict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 We'd have been supporting Syria had it not been voted out as an option. Miliband shouted it down. Can you stop this implicit Labour vs Tory nonsense, ta? I'm not a member of the Labour Party, haven't told anyone to vote for them and coincidentally enough, gave them a flat no today when they asked if I'd like to campaign for them. I protested them during the '00s, just as I've protested the Tories and the BBC during this Parliament. I've actually protested Labour actions more, so I don't need you to contextualise my thoughts on conflict. Happy to do that, it just seems strange that nearly all your 'pictures' have been Tory or UKIP referenced, and none Labour. That does to a certain degree imply a support for them. Perhaps we'll see some more arguments from you against them for this election at some point. I won't hold my breath though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I don't think anyone disagrees with the cost of rents, but how do you limit that? Say you can only increase rents by a certain percentage per year? The Germans maintain a rent index, which prevents landlords from over-charging. This is dovetailed by an overall rule that makes it unlawful for rents to rise more than 20% in three years. You limit it by legislation, the same way we do for any other area of potential abuse, such as employer rights, etc. The form of legislation is up for debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 The Germans maintain a rent index, which prevents landlords from over-charging. This is dovetailed by an overall rule that makes it unlawful for rents to rise more than 20% in three years. You limit it by legislation, the same way we do for any other area of potential abuse, such as employer rights, etc. The form of legislation is up for debate. So if you bought a place that was a hovel, spent significant money renovating/remodelling etc, then you still couldn't increase your rents to a level where it would reflect the value of the property? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 2 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 2 April, 2015 We could reduce pensions by re-introducing more dangerous animals such as i.e. bears and i.e piranhas into certain situations such as i.e. libraries and i.e. garden centres. We could similarly reduce social security by re-introducing i.e. poisonous snakes and i.e. velociraptors into situations such as i.e. betting shop and i.e cash converters. I would probably hold off on your state school recommendation tho, and only introduce i.e. Aids into state schools if proven completely necessary. Admittedly, there would be some knock-on to the NHS with all this, but I think overall the savings could be v.great indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Happy to do that, it just seems strange that nearly all your 'pictures' have been Tory or UKIP referenced, and none Labour. That does to a certain degree imply a support for them. Perhaps we'll see some more arguments from you against them for this election at some point. I won't hold my breath though. I've consistently made arguments against the Labour Party, from their suicidal position on the EU referendum, their blinkers-on approach to the threat of UKIP, the parachuting of Red Princes into places they know nowt about to win a seat they cannot possibly lose. And oh yeah, my frequent assertion that Tony Blair should be tried as a war criminal. I'm sure all of that has just been ignored in your rush to make a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I've consistently made arguments against the Labour Party, from their suicidal position on the EU referendum, their blinkers-on approach to the threat of UKIP, the parachuting of Red Princes into places they know nowt about to win a seat they cannot possibly lose. And oh yeah, my frequent assertion that Tony Blair should be tried as a war criminal. I'm sure all of that has just been ignored in your rush to make a point. I apologise then, I must have missed them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 So if you bought a place that was a hovel, spent significant money renovating/remodelling etc, then you still couldn't increase your rents to a level where it would reflect the value of the property? You're making my point for me. Why the f**k is a professionally educated graduate like yourself even having to consider a hovel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 You're making my point for me. Why the f**k is a professionally educated graduate like yourself even having to consider a hovel? Sorry, I'm not getting your point? I think you need to spell it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Sorry, I'm not getting your point? I think you need to spell it out. You're an established professional graduate. When you went to University, did you think to yourself "my ambition is to buy a hovel", or was it the cold hard reality of the market telling you correctly that it was your best option in a f**ked up housing market? And if your best option is a hovel, what about those that aren't as blessed in the money-making department? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iansums Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 We'd have been supporting Syria had it not been voted out as an option. Miliband shouted it down. Can you stop this implicit Labour vs Tory nonsense, ta? I'm not a member of the Labour Party, haven't told anyone to vote for them and coincidentally enough, gave them a flat no today when they asked if I'd like to campaign for them. I protested them during the '00s, just as I've protested the Tories and the BBC during this Parliament. I've actually protested Labour actions more, so I don't need you to contextualise my thoughts on conflict. What did you do Pap, burn your bra? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 What did you do Pap, burn your bra? Lordy. Put some gloves on those hands or you'll scrape your knuckles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 You're an established professional graduate. When you went to University, did you think to yourself "my ambition is to buy a hovel", or was it the cold hard reality of the market telling you correctly that it was your best option in a f**ked up housing market? And if your best option is a hovel, what about those that aren't as blessed in the money-making department? I don't live in a hovel, my house is quite nice, if not midway through renovations. My flat is also quite nice. However, and this is something that I'm not sure how it would be dealt with, but I haven't raised my rent in 4 years for my tenants, mainly because they're excellent tenants and its VERY difficult to find good tenants that don't coat you more than the rent in missed payments and damage. All I can see happening is that every landlord will raise rents over 3 years by 20%, because everyone else will be. It will benefit some, but most will see an increase in rents due to this. Just my opinion of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Bateman Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 We could reduce pensions by re-introducing more dangerous animals such as i.e. bears and i.e piranhas into certain situations such as i.e. libraries and i.e. garden centres. We could similarly reduce social security by re-introducing i.e. poisonous snakes and i.e. velociraptors into situations such as i.e. betting shop and i.e cash converters. I would probably hold off on your state school recommendation tho, and only introduce i.e. Aids into state schools if proven completely necessary. Admittedly, there would be some knock-on to the NHS with all this, but I think overall the savings could be v.great indeed Edit: Or as pap suggested bring back The Hunger Games Both genius ideas - you get my vote Bearsy!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I don't live in a hovel, my house is quite nice, if not midway through renovations. My flat is also quite nice. However, and this is something that I'm not sure how it would be dealt with, but I haven't raised my rent in 4 years for my tenants, mainly because they're excellent tenants and its VERY difficult to find good tenants that don't coat you more than the rent in missed payments and damage. All I can see happening is that every landlord will raise rents over 3 years by 20%, because everyone else will be. It will benefit some, but most will see an increase in rents due to this. Just my opinion of course. Based on what? Your worst case interpretation of a two-line description of German legislation, AFTER I'd already said the form of legislation is up for debate? Seems to me that you're just as guilty of NIMBYism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Based on what? Your worst case interpretation of a two-line description of German legislation, AFTER I'd already said the form of legislation is up for debate? Seems to me that you're just as guilty of NIMBYism. Why, what nimbyism is there here? They can cap it at 0 for me, it makes no difference to me as I'm not planning on putting my rent up. If you offer a simple, no details solution, then surely I can reply in a simple, no details rebuttal, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Why, what nimbyism is there here? They can cap it at 0 for me, it makes no difference to me as I'm not planning on putting my rent up. If you offer a simple, no details solution, then surely I can reply in a simple, no details rebuttal, no? So what would happen to you if the rent levels were actually set lower than your mortgage repayments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 So what would happen to you if the rent levels were actually set lower than your mortgage repayments? I'd pay the difference myself, I'm not planning on ever selling it. Unlikely that they would be though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I'd pay the difference myself, I'm not planning on ever selling it. Unlikely that they would be though. See, I don't think market rates are remotely sustainable. Evidence? All the money that taxpayers put in to cover other people's rent. Needs to be put to a manageable level in line with earnings. If your tenants are receiving any form of housing benefit, the rest of us are putting money in your pocket. Why should we have to do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 See, I don't think market rates are remotely sustainable. Evidence? All the money that taxpayers put in to cover other people's rent. Needs to be put to a manageable level in line with earnings. If your tenants are receiving any form of housing benefit, the rest of us are putting money in your pocket. Why should we have to do that? I agree market rates aren't sustainable, but I don't really charge market rate. It's worth keeping my tenants over not doing that. My tenants don't claim housing benefit, but even if they were I'd be providing housing for these people. It's the same as someone claiming child benefit, that's my money going into their pockets. I can accept that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I agree market rates aren't sustainable, but I don't really charge market rate. It's worth keeping my tenants over not doing that. My tenants don't claim housing benefit, but even if they were I'd be providing housing for these people. It's the same as someone claiming child benefit, that's my money going into their pockets. I can accept that. I don't think it's remotely the same. Child benefit is paid out because at some point, the state decided that children are both simultaneously useful and a bit of a burden. Housing benefit, as paid now, largely goes to prop up an unsustainable market that grew because state-owned supply was sold off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano6 Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 See, I don't think market rates are remotely sustainable. Evidence? All the money that taxpayers put in to cover other people's rent. Needs to be put to a manageable level in line with earnings. If your tenants are receiving any form of housing benefit, the rest of us are putting money in your pocket. Why should we have to do that? Give them less money then and let the market figure out the new appropriate level. They won't even be worse off, just less will go to tyrants like Unbelievable Jeff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Give them less money then and let the market figure out the new appropriate level. They won't even be worse off, just less will go to tyrants like Unbelievable Jeff. The problem with that, as Verbal points out, is that such a crude mechanism just leads to places like London having all the poor washed out of it. I'd sooner we made it illegal for rents to be higher than a certain level. Then the tyrants (not necessarily UJ) may think about ditching their portfolios, letting the market do its job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Give them less money then and let the market figure out the new appropriate level. They won't even be worse off, just less will go to tyrants like Unbelievable Jeff. Tyrant? Bloody hell! The fact that I bought a flat, decided not to sell it when I bought a new house and now rent it out makes me a tyrant. Perhaps you're right though, I could remove it from the rental market, and make a single mum and her child pay more for a similar place, and leave my place empty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I don't think it's remotely the same. Child benefit is paid out because at some point, the state decided that children are both simultaneously useful and a bit of a burden. Housing benefit, as paid now, largely goes to prop up an unsustainable market that grew because state-owned supply was sold off. Still available to those who earn £50k per year. Be better off reducing this to £30K and then re-routing back into unemployment/disability benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 2 April, 2015 Author Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I don't think it's remotely the same. Child benefit is paid out because at some point, the state decided that children are both simultaneously useful and a bit of a burden. Housing benefit, as paid now, largely goes to prop up an unsustainable market that grew because state-owned supply was sold off. To me, that is much less of a cause than the inability of Local Authorities to replace those houses or flats with new builds, mostly, it must be said, because they were not allowed to spend the cash they got in from the sales - Thatcher got that part seriously wrong. Councils would have loved it, on the whole, if they could have sold off their crappy old housing stock (fortune to maintain) and pre-fab post war sheds (limited life span) and used the money to replace them with new housing for an increasing population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 To me, that is much less of a cause than the inability of Local Authorities to replace those houses or flats with new builds, mostly, it must be said, because they were not allowed to spend the cash they got in from the sales - Thatcher got that part seriously wrong. Councils would have loved it, on the whole, if they could have sold off their crappy old housing stock (fortune to maintain) and pre-fab post war sheds (limited life span) and used the money to replace them with new housing for an increasing population. Good points, Special K. Central government kept most of that money, iirc. Used to pay back debt as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 We'd have been supporting Syria had it not been voted out as an option. Miliband shouted it down. Actually he didn't. Miliband opposed the government motion but put forward an amendment to invade Syria with more 'safeguards'. It was defeated by over 100 votes. He was accused by some of politicking and cynically attempting to use the Syria conflict for domestic political gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Leader's debate starting in 20 mins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Tyrant? Bloody hell! The fact that I bought a flat, decided not to sell it when I bought a new house and now rent it out makes me a tyrant. Perhaps you're right though, I could remove it from the rental market, and make a single mum and her child pay more for a similar place, and leave my place empty. Grubby. Very Grubby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Grubby. Very Grubby. ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I never noticed before, but Ed's got a slightly wonky face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 However much he's become a patsy, Clegg is an outstanding orator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 However much he's become a patsy, Clegg is an outstanding orator. Agree. Always comes across well and sincere. Students can't get past the tuition fee thing though so he will lose a lot of seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Agree. Always comes across well and sincere. Students can't get past the tuition fee thing though so he will lose a lot of seats. It's a shame. The Lib Dems get themselves some great leaders, bit just can't get the seats - Paddy Ashdown was and still is an impressive bloke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Greens are bats. Milliband coming across poorly. Welsh woman utterly pointless and getting 7 statements is boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Fight, fight, fight... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 god, milliband has a **** face. the welsh bird is way out of her depth. Nigel doing alright Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 god, milliband has a **** face. Yo, Brett, not sure if you actually live in Camden, but if you do you coming for a pint next week at London Bridge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Boy Saint Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 There is a bloke on there who has just said he is going rob me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Clegg and Farage come across really well whether you agree with them or not. Better than all the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 as always, all against the PM. you can see why they tend to NOT want to do these Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Farage comes across very well, as if he's the only one telling the truth... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Actually he didn't. Miliband opposed the government motion but put forward an amendment to invade Syria with more 'safeguards'. It was defeated by over 100 votes. He was accused by some of politicking and cynically attempting to use the Syria conflict for domestic political gain. Didn't know about the other motion. The point about Tory truculence should stand though. Hague was itching to get us involved, without any sort of proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I think milliband is having a mare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 I think milliband is having a mare Natalie bennet is by far the worst. She is painful to listen to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Natalie bennet is by far the worst. She is painful to listen to. agree. Nigel and clegg best by far. Cameron is alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 agree. Nigel and clegg best by far. Cameron is alright. Cameron is always just alright. Was last time, is this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joesaint Posted 2 April, 2015 Share Posted 2 April, 2015 Gotta say Farage is winning this... Cameron and Clegg doing OK, but the rest!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now