Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Or alternatively you could say that Watson speaks for the PLP and is a moderating force within the leadership?

 

I'm fucking sick of this grass roots Momentum shit. It's the same type of shit that led to the Brexit referendum, popularist bollocks. No way to run a party, as is being proven by Labour and the Conservatives right now. 

The alternative being domination by 250 individuals a good portion of whom are appointees from the NL era. 

 

Labour was always criticised for being run by union barons casting block votes - Milliband put control in the hand of members just like the other parties - you just don't like those members. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 24.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ewerk

    2605

  • Rayvin

    2524

  • Christmas Tree

    2253

  • Dr Gloom

    1842

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

But surely.....    

Roses are red Violets are blue Please vote for Labour Unless you're a Jew

Posted Images

1 minute ago, zerosum said:

 

Wow. Are you saying .. if you had worked your bollocks off at a young age, pumped some spare funds, or even risked the very roof over your head to get a 2nd or 3rd property.. went through the years of headaches you face as a landlord, the ups and downs of interest rates, property prices, and laws which put all rights with shitty tennants.. then someone comes along as says by the way .. fuck you. we are having this. you’d be ok with your wealth being “distributed “?

 

I think the idea is they are bought for market value, after the tenant has lived there for many years. That's not wealth redistribution, is providing people with security. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NJS said:

The alternative being domination by 250 individuals a good portion of whom are appointees from the NL era. 

 

Labour was always criticised for being run by union barons casting block votes - Milliband put control in the hand of members just like the other parties - you just don't like those members. 

 

Just now, NJS said:

The alternative being domination by 250 individuals a good portion of whom are appointees from the NL era. 

 

Labour was always criticised for being run by union barons casting block votes - Milliband put control in the hand of members just like the other parties - you just don't like those members. 

 

Most weren't members until he did it. Long term members I know have given up and been replaced by people who have done fuck all for Labour. We're seeing how that's playing out now, Labour behind the LDs in some polls. Great. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

If you literally want to move back there and live there in retirement, then I entirely sympathise. If you mean you want to hold out on it and sell it to fund your retirement, then a bit less so imo, because you could have invested your capital elsewhere and freed up a property for someone else. Whilst I get what you're saying, putting the boot on the other foot and thinking about the millions of tenants with no security, I can see both sides.  It must be a nightmare renting with a family in tow. 

 

With the current Mrs PL there’s more chance of flying to the moon on Shergar than living on the edge of the Cheviot hills :glare:

 

It’s in the village where I grew up but both my folks have died in the last year so selling it has crossed my mind more than once. It’s what to invest it into is the question...bricks & mortar is up & down and always will be but long term you can’t really go wrong over 30 years. Am open to suggestions though..

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

I think the idea is they are bought for market value, after the tenant has lived there for many years. That's not wealth redistribution, is providing people with security. 

 

Its losing the option to carry that wealth down your family for your kids 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Alex said:

How is it? If you get the market value of the property. 

 As well as still having the family home. If we're talking about wealth redistribution, which I certainly support, then the first thing I want to target is inheritance anyway, before income tax. If you're comfortable with the idea of leaving your kids a portfolio of buy to let rent properties, I'd suggest you vote tory  

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

 

With the current Mrs PL there’s more chance of flying to the moon on Shergar than living on the edge of the Cheviot hills :glare:

 

It’s in the village where I grew up but both my folks have died in the last year so selling it has crossed my mind more than once. It’s what to invest it into is the question...bricks & mortar is up & down and always will be but long term you can’t really go wrong over 30 years. Am open to suggestions though..

 

Investing in retirement is shit at the moment,  I agree. I will probably downsize to release capital, appreciate thas not always an option either though. There's no easy answers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Alex said:

How is it? If you get the market value of the property. 

 

Errr property goes up in value, rental income goes up over time. Maybe people could have a couple of grand a month rental income in retirement, while owning an asset that increases in value, then your kids get that comfortable cash buffer, until maybe they sell it on a future property price spike (if it ever happens again ha).. 

 

Nice having that choice taken away from a plan.., free society huh 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, zerosum said:

 

Errr property goes up in value, rental income goes up over time. Maybe people could have a couple of grand a month rental income in retirement, while owning an asset that increases in value, then your kids get that comfortable cash buffer, until maybe they sell it on a future property price spike (if it ever happens again ha).. 

 

Nice having that choice taken away from a plan.., free society huh 

 

I guess it depends on whether you believe in an equitable society or if you prefer the Thatcherite ideology where only family matters? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zerosum said:

 

Wow. Are you saying .. if you had worked your bollocks off at a young age, pumped some spare funds, or even risked the very roof over your head to get a 2nd or 3rd property.. went through the years of headaches you face as a landlord, the ups and downs of interest rates, property prices, and laws which put all rights with shitty tennants.. then someone comes along as says by the way .. fuck you. we are having this. you’d be ok with your wealth being “distributed “?

 

Are you saying that the same opportunities are available to younger people as they were to older people? I mean, I shouldn't have to pay the pensions of people who retire at 65 when I will probably be working until 78 (or more likely the day I die) - and yet I have no choice.

 

I mean seriously, I recall in the early 2000s my parents bought a house for around £90k and then 5 years later sold it for £200k immediately paying off their entire mortgage. If that kind of benefit occurs in my lifetime as an adult I'll be absolutely amazed. That generation were lucky as sin to live through the era they did, a Labour era I'll stress, while all my generation has had is years of 'drawbridge pulling up' Tory bollocks.

 

In answer to your question - if I had worked hard through my young age, as I have, and put spare funds away, as I have, and bought property with the money - and then was told later in life when I'm comfortable and without financial concern that someone was going to buy the house I was renting out at some kind of agreed upon rate that would enable them to have a better life and had the net positive effect that society wouldn't literally tear itself apart further down the line, then yeah I probably would be ok with it as long as it was being done in a fair and equitable way. I would expect them to start at the very top of society and work down - you know, the ones who haven't actually worked all that hard but were born into their wealth and network based privilege.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, zerosum said:

 

Errr property goes up in value, rental income goes up over time. Maybe people could have a couple of grand a month rental income in retirement, while owning an asset that increases in value, then your kids get that comfortable cash buffer, until maybe they sell it on a future property price spike (if it ever happens again ha).. 

 

Nice having that choice taken away from a plan.., free society huh 

Err, prices continuing to increase at a rate above inflation is, apart from being very damaging to many people in society, ultimately unsustainable. It might not be you who gets bitten on the arse by it, it might not be your kids (although I can’t see something not having to give before too long) but, if not, it’ll probably be theirs. I don’t mean to have a go at you as an individual but it simply can’t be allowed to continue if you want future generations (including your own family) to be able to buy their own place. Otherwise at some point nearly everyone will be renting from a very small group of very wealthy individuals. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NJS said:

The alternative being domination by 250 individuals a good portion of whom are appointees from the NL era. 

 

Labour was always criticised for being run by union barons casting block votes - Milliband put control in the hand of members just like the other parties - you just don't like those members. 

I don’t like them either, since they’re basically continuing to facilitate (not just any but) this fucking Tory government 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alex said:

Err, prices continuing to increase at a rate above inflation is, apart from being very damaging to many people in society, ultimately unsustainable. It might not be you who gets bitten on the arse by it, it might not be your kids (although I can’t see something not having to give before too long) but, if not, it’ll probably be theirs. I don’t mean to have a go at you as an individual but it simply can’t be allowed to continue if you want future generations (including your own family) to be able to buy their own place. Otherwise at some point nearly everyone will be renting from a very small group of very wealthy individuals. 

 

Theres affordable options for people though. And if that means moving location, or doing something in advance to create a bit of extra capital (if the individual is determined enough to own something or invest) then it can be done. 2nd jobs, a side hustle.. it’s not beyond motivated people.

 

A lot of people are just comfortable where they are, happy with the jobs they have, don’t want to improve their lives or their future.. that’s fine. But that should not be taken from those who were the opposite imo.

 

Iif people are hungry enough to change their personal circumstances.. the same opportunities are available to everyone who is fit and able. It takes effort, risk, uncertainty.. but it’s there.. if you look.

 

As for distribution of wealth. I’m not against paying a bit of extra tax, not against inheritance tax (to an extent), I don’t mind businesses having their wings clipped a bit as long as it goes back into the parts of our society that really need it.

 

I liked the new Labour values, was more centre.. at the moment it’s far too left for me. Especially Mcdonnel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Of course. That's why we need government to deal with societal matters rather than rely on a dog eat dog world. 

 

We do yeah. But mate, the whole world is dog eat dog. We have it easy in this country yet still people who are fit and able don’t see it. Try living in a dog eat dog world in India or Indonesia or Africa.. that’s tough. Not the UK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, zerosum said:

 

We do yeah. But mate, the whole world is dog eat dog. We have it easy in this country yet still people who are fit and able don’t see it. Try living in a dog eat dog world in India or Indonesia or Africa.. that’s tough. Not the UK.

 

Have you ever been homeless? How would you have any idea how 'easy' it is to be on the breadline, or how difficult it is to be impoverished. The only way we can understand it is by listening to people who are. We've reduced mental health spending, we've reduced homelessness funding, and we live in a world where it is getting harder and harder to raise yourself up with social mobility - so much so that even the Labour party recently abandoned the notion.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/15/social-mobility-in-richest-countries-has-stalled-since-1990s

 

What if your experience to get to where you are simply can't be recreated now? What if you had it easy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Have you ever been homeless? How would you have any idea how 'easy' it is to be on the breadline, or how difficult it is to be impoverished. The only way we can understand it is by listening to people who are. We've reduced mental health spending, we've reduced homelessness funding, and we live in a world where it is getting harder and harder to raise yourself up with social mobility - so much so that even the Labour party recently abandoned the notion.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jun/15/social-mobility-in-richest-countries-has-stalled-since-1990s

 

What if your experience to get to where you are simply can't be recreated now? What if you had it easy?

 

I’ve said plenty times I don’t mind paying more tax or business having to pay a bit more as long as it goes into parts of society that needs it most,

 

That includes homeless, people who have had bad luck but are willing to change.. children , pensioners, disabled.. those who are “unable” for genuine reasons mate 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gonna add to that as well - what if you're just made of sterner stuff than other people. Call it a genetic lottery. Does that mean they deserve to live in ever worsening conditions, always looking over their shoulders as society and the economy leaves them behind?

 

More and more of the lower middle class are starting to struggle.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/03/demise-middle-classes-british-politics-digital-age

 

We actually do -need- to start doing something about it. And I don't necessarily mean you're the problem since you worked hard and deserve what you have, but the 1% super rich I mean... there are limits to how far people should be allowed to go, and the fact that CEO wages have gone from 2 or 3 times that of workers to something like 150 times now is a sign that society has really lost control of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, zerosum said:

 

I’ve said plenty times I don’t mind paying more tax or business having to pay a bit more as long as it goes into parts of society that needs it most,

 

That includes homeless, people who have had bad luck but are willing to change.. children , pensioners, disabled.. those who are “unable” for genuine reasons mate 

 

Not having a dig at you personally btw, just the view.

 

And by and large I think the money does go where it's needed. Who is it that you think doesn't need it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...