You might think house prices are not that important, but the reality is, credit cycles caused by the purchase of land are the primary economic driver in the modern debt based economy (USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand). Continue readingby
I have a varied taste in music. I hesitate to use the word eclectic; after all it has been nearly 10 years since I lived in Hoxton and Shoreditch. I enjoy good music, that is, I like music which agrees with my ear. From pop to jazz, to ska, punk, reggae, dub, drum and bass, even klezmer music, and of course the classics. Continue readingby
I was watching my latest favourite inspiration, Chamath Palihapitiya talking about technology on CNBC squawk box. I first came across Chamath talking about Bitcoin. He’s a sharp talker and like a lot of successful people he is driven and speaks with conviction, so when he speaks people listen. When the anchor of squawk box, Joe Kernan rebuffed Chamath’s view on man made global warming, I was delighted. Finally, it’s so good to hear an opinion which isn’t mainstream in the mainstream press. It seems CNBC has taken quite a lot of flack for having a lot of global warming deniers on their books. Good for them.
I then stumbled across this article in TeenVogue: Kids Win the Right to Sue Government over Global Warming. So the kids can sue for their ruined future. Good for them. But what happens when the world wakes up to realise their future isn’t ruined after all, and that what has taken place over the last two decades has been corporate wealth extraction of the highest order? Yeah, never mind the kids, what about us adults being taxed heavily by the global warming zealots, especially those of us who don’t believe that 0.01% more CO2 in the atmosphere is a bad thing? It’s good for tomatoes, and tomatoes are delicious. So will we be allowed to sue, and if so who do we sue? We could sue ourselves for our own gullibility? Continue readingby
Let’s play a word association game. wildlife…..television……
You said David Attenborough didn’t you?
He’s been on our screens pretty much since television was invented, OK at least since people started watching it in the UK. He was controller of BBC 2 in 1965 and director of programmes (BBC 1 and 2) in 1969, he is rightly considered a national treasure and in 2006 was voted most trusted celebrity in a 2006 readers digest poll. David knows what he’s talking about, and people trust what he says. What’s so wrong with that? Continue readingby
I was reading the front page of The Times newspaper when I came across a news item about some European leaders response to PM May’s speech at the Conservative Party conference. It seems they weren’t very happy with her, or what she was saying. This is hardly surprising, but is it newsworthy? Continue readingby
After many years of waiting for the housing market to adjust to something which I might consider affordable, my partner and I decided to buy a home of our own. An unaffordable home, or one barely affordable. This is the housing market as it currently stands in the UK, caused by banks’ unconstrained credit creation directed into residential property. Continue readingby
I don’t own a digital camera, apart from the iPhone 6s I’m writing this on. It’s not that I don’t want to buy and try, but I just think that digital cameras are all about the moving image, while stills, especially medium format, is still the preserve of film cameras. I’m interested in what digital can give over and above a single exposed image; think 4K video, image stabilisation, time-lapse, videogram and pulling single frames from a video. More on that later. Continue readingby
On the 23rd of June, the majority of the UK voted to leave the EU. This was a momentous occasion, it will not be without short term pain, but by focussing on the benefits and the opportunities, and by looking to the future we are now facing enormous opportunities for the UK economy. Continue readingby
Brexit was a significant moment for the UK, the EU member states as well as the USA. All share neoliberal economic models, all are saddled with debt, and all are operating zero or negative interest rate policies. Brexit is a symptom of the economic state of the UK and how badly it has got out of whack. Momentous things like a moderate country leaving a 40 plus year political and economic relationship doesn’t just happen. This was a shock to all involved, especially the Leave campaign. I am a libertarian, but I admit that the majority of the UK do not share my bold and brave outlook, so nobody was as surprised as me. We should view Brexit as the black swan event that it is, an opportunity to give a double take, and to ask ourselves, ‘what do we need to do to secure the economy?’, because after 7 years of “fony finance” things are about to get real. Continue readingby
On the 23rd June 2016, the British people showed courage and fortitude; put two fingers up to the establishment and voted to leave the EU. Despite what the sore losers in the press would have you believe, the majority voted to leave the EU in order to restore sovereign power to the UK; brexit was a vote for British democracy. Let’s have a look at the brexit fallout, and try to make some sense of what’s really going on. Continue readingby
As the dust settles after the Brexit fallout, many of those who voted to leave are experiencing voters remorse. There may be some apprehension, but we who voted against the stable but dysfunctional EU have done something brave and rather beneficial, not just for the UK, but also for Europe and the World. Continue readingby
I don’t know about you, but I am not a big fan of bullies. I don’t like other people being bullied, and I don’t much like being bullied myself. My major concern with the EU, and the primary reason that I cannot vote for it, no matter how much I love our European neighbours (I was born abroad and lived there for many years) is the small issue of democracy. It’s odd that such a triviality has been virtually overlooked by all who are discussing the Brexit campaign.
The EU government has very little in common with constituent parts that make Europe so special. Instead, it is seeking a sort of supra-national Euro state with no sovereignty to speak of.
The EU structure is a bureaucrats dream, it has ambitions to grow ever bigger year after year, ambitions which are not challenged and cannot be stopped. It requires more and more funding every year, which it gets (under laws it makes itself). The EU is unaccountable, run by unelected individuals, and yet it has the opportunity to legislate across the customs union borders and have that legislature implemented by majority voting. In short, the EU government is turning into a monster, the Euro currency is an unmitigated disaster, and yet nobody seems to notice the reality or care much about it. In fact, our own prime minister is wholeheartedly encouraging us to vote for a system which is fundamentally undemocratic. What does that say about him?
There is said to be a big swing towards the remain camp in the younger voting population. They seem to be interested in staying in the EU. Perhaps they don’t understand the issues. I remember when I was young. I though that Tony Blair was a decent bloke. The simple fact is, I didn’t have a clue about politics when I was in my twenties. Now I’m in my thirties I have a much better idea what they’re up to, having studied the subject at more length. I now know that Tony Blair is not a very nice person, and that he pulled the wool over everybody’s eyes on pretty much everything he did. After that performance I’m surprised they give him any air time at all. They should have tried his for war crimes and if found guilty, locked him in the Tower of London with the Ravens.
I would put it out there that the majority of the young are far too busy facebooking, tweeting pictures of their meals and most of all looking good to care about politics and economics, let alone democracy, and so they may well vote to remain, but I doubt many of them will have thought about the major issues of the Brexit vote, or would even care to.
Democracy is important, it provides accountability, giving individuals some say in the way publicly pooled resources are applied in the real world. For example, things which benefit the people should be encouraged above government pet projects. The EU is fundamentally undemocratic. It is a practical dictatorship, if a reasonably well-behaved one, at least so far. Merkel and Junker, Chancellor of Deutschland and President of the EU respectively, act like they don’t really care what the ‘Euro people’ (whoever they are) want.
They showed their true colours when Greece voted to reject the EU austerity package. What happened next? The Greeks were told to accept it. Never mind the vote, you do as you’re told Greece. This was either down to a spineless PM Tsipras, or no real interest is what the Greeks want or don’t want. Probably a bit of both. Even alopecian philosopher Yanis Varoufakis has come out to defend the EU, which has taken him to the lowest of my estimation. These politicians have no integrity whatsoever, they’re just playing a part in a play, and they change parts every six months.
If a country looks like it is going to get a right-wing party at the helm, Donald Tusk states that they will lose their influence to vote in the EU. How is this anything but dictatorship? “If you behave as I like, you will be allowed to participate, but if you don’t you will be excluded.”
It is also important to note that the Euro was designed from the outset as a weapon of mass financial destruction to achieve ‘Une certaine idée de L’Europe’, again undefined. It was designed to cause the sorts of financial instability which would lead to countries giving up their sovereignty in return for being saved from certain economic death and destruction. It is clever, and insidious, and with hindsight it has succeeded in its aims remarkably well. Don’t just take my word for it, listen to Bernard Connolly.
20 years ago Connolly, who worked as a senior economist with the European Union, published ‘The Rotten Heart of Europe’; his take on the damage that monetary union would do to the single currency participants. Shortly after the book was published, he was sacked. Why? He pointed out that you cannot have monetary union without fiscal union (money and the how it is spent must be centrally controlled), that the EU’s aims are to drive countries towards giving up their sovereignty in favour of the European identity, moving away from national sovereignty (something which people can belong to) towards an anarcho-capitalist empire (Europe).
As they have lost their national identity, as they have ceded sovereignty to the undefined vision of the EU, people are seeking out extreme right wing groups to belong to something. These organisations are typically focussed on what they are *not*, rather than on what they *are*, which as we are seeing is not going to end well. The EU, in quashing democracy is actually causing a situation which, like the anarcho-capitalist Austro-Hungarian empire before it, is more likely to lead to WW3 than to abate it.
The ‘United States of Europe’ (USE) will not become a reality without a fight, and probably a global one. Anybody who thinks they can dictate for the masses finds their plans will fall short of the mark every time. The USE or the New Soviet Union (NSU), is a concept born of the 20th century, and it clearly belongs there. Tusks’s concerns about Brexit are probably valid; that the UK’s exit will signify the beginning of the end for the EU and the Euro, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t jump from the sinking ship, and if it’s so fragile as not allow a minor player like the UK to do its own thing, the EU is clearly beyond help and its out duty to lead the exodus from the burning building.
So Donald Tusk, and more recently our own dear Chancellor George Osborne, are using threatening bully boy tactics to get people to vote remain. Meanwhile Tusk has explained that if the UK leaves the EU, there will be pain for a number of years. This makes me want to vote leave even more, to prove him wrong. What proud country would allow themselves to be bullied like this? The same goes for Osborne. The Remain camp are losing ground and have serious concerns that their pampered, subsidised lives are about to come to an end. Sh*t is about to get real. As somebody pointed out on Twitter, how would Osborne execute such a move from the back benches? Good point.
I hate the way David Cameron talks about how the EU brexit vote is a choice for ‘you the public’, that he will do whatever we ask him to, that it is not about him, it is about what the people want, and in the same breath tells us that we must vote to remain in the EU. These individuals have overstepped the mark, and their accounts should be struck from the record. When George Osborne says he will raise taxes if we vote to leave. These are dirty tricks, and rather than scaring us, they should strengthen our determination to take back our own power, not just from the EU government, but from the UK government too. We should chuck out Osborne and Cameron at the earliest opportunity for disgraceful behaviour.
When the time comes to go to the ballot box on the 23rd, remember that little issue called democracy, as it’s very future lies in the balance. It might be a bad system, but it’s the best we’ve got, and the EU is not heading towards giving more power to the people, it is heading towards an anarcho-capitalist empire with a European agenda (whatever that is) as its core aim. It will not represent the UK better than the UK can represent itself, and by showing its contempt for those countries which foolishly joined the single currency, it has provided an easy decision to exit for many who still care about democracy. If you vote remain, you are voting against democracy.
The best argument I’ve heard for voting leave was this question. “If we had a choice to join the EU now, would we do it?” I don’t think we would, and that is why I think we should get the hell out of its grappling clutches ASAP.
If you are still on the fence, watch Lord Owen’s case for brexit. Sobering stuff.by
I’ve been wanting to write a piece about Brexit for a while now, above and beyond my strong feelings about the British fishing industry which the Brussels Common Fisheries Policy has all but destroyed, but I’ve not found much time recently to put fingers to keys. The arrival of the young pup has taken up a fair bit of my spare time. It’s been good to have time to think though, as I now have more consolidated views on the subject.
First I need to talk about the Brexit coverage in the press, and while this is an obvious point, you need to remember that everyone who has an opinion on Brexit (and any other topic for that matter) is speaking from their own selfish, self-interested point of view. If I have learned one thing from my years on earth it is that people are selfishly oriented, and if you accept that as the basis of who they are what they say and do, things will go smoother for you.
Now, it is also worth saying that some of those selfish people do care deeply about other people, and so their selfish approach involves what they deem to be best for other people, but they are benefitting themselves personally at the core. When you hear politicians, the IMF, any government organisation, Scientists, Arts funds, anyone, making a view about the larger government organisation that sits above it, and from which it does or doesn’t receive funding (the EU), know that whatever view they hold is because of how it benefits them.
What is sorely lacking from the debate is how the ordinary man on the street, how you and I are going to be affected by a change to the status quo, by a severing of bureaucratic ties to brussels. Economists for Brexit have had a go, and put forward the case for Brexit, led by academic Patrick Minford, these 8 independent economists have discussed the various elements of the debate and argue for the free market, deregulated model. Essentially they are individuals who at their core believe in the economic benefit of the free market, over the protectionist customs union, and a centralised, unelected, undemocratic government. Just look at Greece). Of course we may have the very same happen to us here. We might choose, like the Greeks, to vote no to the EU, and be overruled anyway.
If you’ve read any of the articles on this site, you will know that I am vote leave. I’d even reduce the control and power of the UK government if I could. UK politicians might well choose to vote to remove power from the EU government, so that more of it returns to them. But at least we vote for UK politicians, so there is some accountability, unlike the European government decision makers. In this article I will spell out my arguments for leaving the EU, and why you might choose to also vote leave on the 23rd.
This topic deserves a whole book to itself; the subject of the 21st century is decentralisation of power, physical power in the form of decentralisation of electrical power generation, decentralised mobile communications, decentralisation of publishing (kindle and ebook publishing), the media and how having a Facebook or Twitter account makes you a creator as well as a consumer of media, decentralisation of business via the internet, the decentralisation of money from banks by bitcoin and the blockchain, and now the decentralisation of government away from large bureaucracies to more and more devolution and self government. Large organisations become unwieldy, ineffective and cut off from the world, stuck in their own ideas. Like the captain of the Titanic proudly steaming forward into an iceberg field.
You can try to stem the tide of decentralisation, but you will only hold it off for so long. Just as the Scots nearly voted out of the UK, but fell for scaremongering, so a remain vote this time around would only put off the inevitable in a few years’ time. It is fair to say that we end up livingbegat the general consensus is, and if the consensus likes being part of a modern Austro-Hungarian Empire, if they like being told what to do by people who have very little understanding of the them of their specific lives, this is what we will get. Do you like self government, or do you like being told what to do? You’d be surprised how many people just want to be told what to do and follow those orders. Do you like being able to boot out politicians who don’t perform, or would you rather have them thrust upon you with little say?
In case you hadn’t noticed, the EU, largely because of the terrible idea of monetary union, is in verg poor condition. The ‘real economy’ isn’t doing so badly, but the financial infrastructure which sits behind our money systems has been allowed to concoct too many, too-clever-for-their-own-good financial instruments, things like derivatives which on paper alone make for a pretty good way to hedge risk.
This problem has come about because of market meddling. When markets are not allowed to function as markets, they get skewed, and businesses which would have in the past paid for their poor decision-making with bankruptcy, instead of going to the wall they live to make another bad decision, and another, and another. They are encouraged to make ever more risky bets. Eventually we end up in a place where moral hazard prevails, because everyone is now a winner, interest rates are zero, and people are forced to look to ever and ever riskier ‘investments’ to get a return on their cash.
The financial system in the UK, US and Europe was never allowed to crash, to clear out the rotten institutions and processes which had brought it to the brink of death in 2008, this cancker has been allowed to spread through the rest of the tree. Central banks have been pumping liquidity into the global financial system to try to revive the arresting economy, but it has done very little but pump up asset prices. Europe is a mess, USA is a mess and the UK is a mess. The banks are ready to blow up as the extent of their liabilities becomes evident. JP Morgan Chase’s Jamie Dimon is using the Brexit referendum as a handy excuse to lay off 20% of his workforce if the UK votes to leave the EU. Nice move Jamie.
There’s no point trying to pretend that the countries in the Eurozone are the same; they clearly aren’t, and trying to peg them all to the same currency is only going to end in tears for some. In normal economies, as a country excels in exporting, its currency overvalues, which acts as a natural brake, restoring balance. While poorer countries have the opportunity to devalue their currencies and become competitive. But when the south of Italy or Greece has the same currency as Germany, the stronger country is going to do disproportionately well at the expense of the weaker one. Is this a bunch of people we want to hitch our economic fortunes to? Or would leaving them to it be the best course of action?
It is clear that a political union called Europe cannot exist without a common currency called the Euro. Given what has happened in the last 24 months in Europe with the Euro, do we really want to be a part of something with such fundamental flaws? Oddly nobody seems to think that the Euro is a bad thing, that what has happened is just a blip on the radar. These are the people who read the papers and digest what they are told, never really thinking about the real issues which lie behind them, the fundamentals and how wrong they are.
The political position of brexit is a fascinating one, which is transcending even party political boundaries; we have rifts in the Tory party as politicians take sides, and each takes swipes at the other. Both the leavers and the retainers know how important the vote is, paling into insignificance even a general election which is, lets face it, pretty much like picking from a line up of ugly girls. What we are seeing is the true blue versus red. Let me explain.
In his excellent book, Life After the State – Why we Don’t Need Government, Dominic Frisby put into words a great number of points which I had observed and desired to be different in my own life, but had never managed to put into words. Frisby is a free market libertarian, and I share many of his views on Government; namely that it should exist to provide essential public services which need to be centrally organised, but that it should not be a key decision-maker in its own right. The government should exist to carry out the will of the people. People vote, and the government does what they vote for. How novel.
Conservatism is about self-empowerment, about creating the atmosphere where individuals can make for themselves, can stand up and be counted (community charge rather than council tax bands), where individuals; husbands, wives, parents and even children are best placed to decided how they live, which laws are passed, and where they spend their money. Not given away in taxes to large bureaucratic organisations which inefficiently divvy it out to the causes that they consider to be worthy, keeping a fair chunk of it to pay for their own expenses, of course.
Conservatism is about acknowledging that everybody has value, and that they can make a success of their lives if they are only given the opportunity to make their mark on the world. What does that look like? Well, clearly it looks a lot different to the current state of affairs, because I don’t see very much conservatism going on. I see a lot of people still of the government payroll, whether the UK, or the EU superstate. Once milk is flowing from the nipple, it is hard to say no. The UK gives handouts to the underachievers or Europe, much keeping them in their wretchedness rather than demonstrating how to thrive to the rest of europe, we would rather sit in the tub with the others and do what the british do best; whinge.
I have often thought that the Brits wouldn’t appreciate a land like Switzerland where everything is logical, where things run on time, towns are clean, where money is spent transparently, where people have pride in their achievement. We Brits would have nothing to whinge about.
Socialists have embedded deep inside them views which effectively say that there are good people in the world and bad people. The good people are poor and the bad people are rich. The good people are usually socialists, because they hace an innate tendency to agree with the unfairmess in life. They mean well. The rich, usually conservative, self empowered types apparently got their ill-gotten-gains through some bad behaviour. They took more than their fair share and so they should give some of their wealth to those who have-not.
The ‘remain’ camp either believes in the injustice of capitalism, that people can have too much money, or they are those who have benefitted from the status quo and want to keep things that way. They believe that government is good, and that centralised planning and expenditure is better than decentralised power. Either that, or they can’t be bothered to sit down and actually think about how politics works.
They believe that a centralised government is better placed to take your money and spend it on your behalf, precisely because if the government didn’t take you money and give it to these ‘good causes’ that no human being would ever choose to do so himself. Socialists believe that man is inherently bad natured, and that he cannot be relied upon to show compassion for his fellow man, and so we don’t even get a chance to try. All compassion is outsourced to the government. When we see a beggar on the street, our natural response is “I pay enough in taxes, go and get a hand out from the government like all those other sponges who don’t contribute to society.”
When you hand over your human responsibility to your fellow man to a faceless government corporation, you become less human in the process. This is the irony of socialism, in trying to make people more humane, it actually takes away their humanity.
If you’ve ever worked in or for a public sector organisation, you will be well aware that your taxpayer money is being spent in an inefficient manner. These businesses are not real businesses which have to make ends meet, if they were private sector businesses they would have folded decades ago. The people who work for them have a view that they know best, and the way they deal with the private sector is self important because they have the money, that private sector businesses want.
“But we get handouts from the EU government!” I hear you cry. “We can’t vote to leave the EU.” OK, and where, pray, do you think those funds come from? Do you think the EU government is a productive organisation generating its own cash? It doesn’t take long to find out where the EU gets its money from, and it won’t surprise you. On the EU website, the source of its “own resources” is clearly stated:
Like any bureaucracy with growing aspirations, the EU budget has got out of hand and it needs more and more cash from members to fund itself and its schemes. The balancing system becomes the largest source of revenue. There is a bit more money from EU fines (usually big, successful US businesses), taxes on EU salaries, and contributions from non-EU countries. So how much do you think this giant bureaucratic machine costs to run? Well, in 2011, the EU administration costs were €8.3bn. Quite expensive, and no wonder people on the EU gravy train want to keep things ticking along nicely……
The EU is a private members club, a gated city where the rich EU ‘members’ (the terminology speaks volumes) live and do business with each other. They want nothing whatsoever to do with the poor people who live outside the tall, policed iron gates, and while they could very well trade with them and give their citizens goods at a lower price, in order to keep their own goods makers rich they charge import duties on the goods coming in from oupside the trade block. The citizens of the Gated City pay more for their goods than they otherwise might, raising their cost of living.
Inefficient organisations which wouldn’t survive without this protectionist mechanism are encouraged to go on in their inefficiencies. The government of gated city believe that enriching uncompetitive manufacturing businesses is worth the high price on increased cost of living, because some of that money is paid to individuals who work for these companies and earn wage. It doesn’t stop the poor people living outside the city trying to scale the dangerously high walls to get inside to improve their lives, and they come in their thousands. Many of them die making the journey, others fall from the walls and perish before they even land foot in the city. One wonders whether it might be a better idea to just allow them the opportunity to trade with those in the gated city on a global level, thereby enriching themselves where they currently stand rather than leaving them like a beggar on the street. It’s the same argument; Socialist vs Conservative on a bigger scale.
Subsidies are the opposite of a free market, and yet the EU loves to hand out money to organisations who are not competitive, rather than allow them to adapt and improve they carry on, like a blundering public sector organisation, never being forced to adapt or die.
The EU loves to regulate. Regulation quashes the free market. Regulation affects your competitiveness, because you have rules to comply with. You can’t just get on with what you are doing, you need to comply with the regulations, much of which gets in the way of a productive, efficient output. Go and work in a public sector organisation for six to twelve months, and you will know what I mean. Very little gets done, even though there are people scurrying about all over the place, doing their best to look busy, so that they can collect their pay cheque and do the bare minimum necessary to prevent from getting sacked.
The free market is the reason I will vote to leave the EU, the opportunity to give capital a chance to work once more. Capital works though market forces to find the most appropriate place to go. I’m not saying have no regulations, I’m saying set your policy on things that matter (e.g. pollution and not CO2), immigration which encourages talent, taxation which encourages innovation and entrepreneurialism, regulation which is light enough to do the same. We want to give people a chance to make for themselves, not be reliant on handouts, whether on the dole, or benefits, or taking subsidies from the government whether the EU or the UK, or working on some phoney government project.
Is Boris Johnson paid by the hedge funds to vote for a Brexit? Possibly. He doubtless has many friends in the City of London following his stint as mayor. Removing regulation would be a good thing, as would letting banks which fail go to the wall. This is the only way to make them accountable, not by propping them up against all sensibility. I do believe that Bojo and David Cameron are both Conservatives who want a Brexit for the UK. If you don’t believe Dave wants Brexit, watch his Bloomberg speech on youtube. For some reason Cameron has changed his mind after his visit to brussels, I wonder how the conversation went?
As for the rest of them, the IMF, the OBR, the OECD, John Major, Scientists, Actors, and even Barack Obama are obviously all benefitting from the EU in one way or another. But are you, the men and women on the street? I suspect that unless you work for a protected industry, you will be better off out of the EU working in a more real economy.
If you vote to remain, you are essentially saying that you are happy to have no control over your political system, the laws and stifling regulations which will will be passed upon you by unelected representatives who we cannot remove if we don’t like.by
I spend a lot of time on the M5. Not as much as a professional driver, but at least 10 hours a week bombing north to south, south to north.
Motorways like the M5 are the arteries which carry the life blood of our country about. If you want to know what people are buying, have a look at what’s going up and down the ‘backbone of Britain’.
We have shipping companies, retailers, hauliers of everything from live animals to kitchen timber, bespoke fabrications, train axles, even 50ft yachts make their way along the motorway. What I have noticed recently is a rise of the number of static homes moving down the road.
I’m not a gambling man, but if I were to gamble on one thing happening over the next three decades, it would be a significant rise in the number of people moving out of proper houses into retirement static homes.
It makes perfect sense to me. The baby boomers have huge property wealth, and potentially thirty years of lifestyle to fund. They have looked at what their pension pot means in real terms, and realise it doesn’t mean very much, and so are cashing in their casino chips, and undertaking the ultimate downsizing to raise funds to live well in their final decades.
It needn’t have been this way, of course. But the government, any government, was never going to deflate the housing bubble in the UK once it was blown up. Instead they just kept on blowing it up and up in the hope the lack of decent housing supply would stay off the ‘pop’ until they’d left office.
Many people bemoan the lack of new build housing in the UK. Personally I’m not in the least bit concerned. For every new static home I see moving down the M5 means a proper house coming back onto the property market. As the baby boomers retire and perform the ultimate in downsizing, not only are we getting a flood of new properties on the market, we may very well see an oversupply of the kind of properties that real people can actually afford. This means only one thing, falling prices all round. Developers may be building new condos in London, but most Londoners don’t even know what a condo is. Investors in China however….
Even though I’ve bought a house, I’m all for falling house prices, even if it means negative equity for a period. For too long the UK Govt has focussed on property price rises at any cost. We don’t want high living costs, we want low living costs. We don’t want lifetime debts, we want freedom. We don’t want money tied up in bricks and mortar, we want innovation, sustainability and new technology to improve our lives.
The U.K. has long been obsessed with property, and rising property prices (as if it was a good thing), so much so that almost everybody I meet is a multiple property owner. Even people I work with in their early 20’s are part time landlords and landladies. I wonder which provides them with more income, working or owning property. When market saturation has reached the point where people with a 20k salary are BTL landlords, it says a lot about the state of the market, and where things are headed. Behold the future of uk property.
Stay in the EU, or leave? What difference does it make? Not a great deal you might think. I’m sure it won’t make much difference to my life, but as someone with an overarching interest in self government, there’s simply no way that I would vote to have some far off bureaucrat making decisions about the UK. Continue readingby
This is going to come across not at all well. It’s not that I’m stabbing my fellow filmies in the back, I just think it needs to be said. There are a few people out there, in fact more than a few, loads of people who think that if they take a photograph using a film camera that the image is somehow magically transmutated into art. Continue readingby