Should billionaires and multinationals pay fair tax?

Do you mean negative equity? Or an over payment on account ?

Neither but, as it was Nosey's phrase, ask him mebbe?

To me though, borrowing another £30k where you're already heavily indebted and committed to a raft of other repayments, is not wise......
 
It's like Freeports. Millions of pounds of goods stashed that adds value to the country that holds it.
I’m not sure freeports add value.

Cameron never bothered renewing the license for freeports because they weren’t a benefit.


Re tax question.
Start taxing the rich then they will leave. The money they stash and spend adds value to country
It is a consideration but the answer is complex, I don’t think it’s necessarily a given.

Certainly globalisation does mean money can be easily moved around these days + the world is dominated by big business, sadly we can’t just tell Amazon, Google, Apple etc what to do.




Remember. Health and wealth are not fairly distributed amongst the population
There is far more wealth inequality in the U.K. than most European countries / Western economies

If other countries have less inequality and better living standards for ordinary folk, I think that means the U.K. can do better.
 
The argument being made originally was that asset price inflation in the housing market was a bad thing.

However, house mortgage rates are lower than marine and car finance rates for example, primarily because boats go down in value. Therefore the loan is riskier as the lender's potential loss due to default risk increases over time on a boat/car and reduces over time on a house. Next we have the building industry, which we can see depends on the investment increasing in value to justify the investment.

We don't have to guess.. experts tell us its a fact:


So we need the value of houses to go up, in order to create the economic environment for house builders to build and home owners to invest.
 
So we need the value of houses to go up, in order to create the economic environment for house builders to build and home owners to invest.
thats bolox

Uk housebuilders were perfectly able to build houses decades ago when ratio of house value to wages was far lower
 
You missed out renters: what do they need house values to do?
If a house cost £100k today and £75k in 5 years, would you rent or buy?

If you were borrowing money to buy the above would you be happy.

If you wanted to be a landlord, would you increase the rent of a property likely to fall in value to make your return?
 
If a house cost £100k today and £75k in 5 years, would you rent or buy?

If you were borrowing money to buy the above would you be happy.

If you wanted to be a landlord, would you increase the rent of a property likely to fall in value to make your return?
Why are you always seeing the owning of a home as a business venture or from the viewpoint of Rigsby Inc? Many buy or need a house because they need a home, irrespective of what the house market may do.
 
If a house cost £100k today and £75k in 5 years, would you rent or buy?

If you were borrowing money to buy the above would you be happy.

If you wanted to be a landlord, would you increase the rent of a property likely to fall in value to make your return?

More false propositions, to support your position.

What is wrong with aspiring, as a nation, that housing is seen as an affordable right for all and owning, a sustainably affordable prospect for those of realistic means?

That housing is a good, safe investment is most of what is wrong with "the market".
 
The argument being made originally was that asset price inflation in the housing market was a bad thing.

However, house mortgage rates are lower than marine and car finance rates for example, primarily because boats go down in value. Therefore the loan is riskier as the lender's potential loss due to default risk increases over time on a boat/car and reduces over time on a house. Next we have the building industry, which we can see depends on the investment increasing in value to justify the investment.

We don't have to guess.. experts tell us its a fact:


So we need the value of houses to go up, in order to create the economic environment for house builders to build and home owners to invest.
Wrong
 
Why are you always seeing the owning of a home as a business venture or from the viewpoint of Rigsby Inc? Many buy or need a house because they need a home, irrespective of what the house market may do.
More false propositions, to support your position.

What is wrong with aspiring, as a nation, that housing is seen as an affordable right for all and owning, a sustainably affordable prospect for those of realistic means?

That housing is a good, safe investment is most of what is wrong with "the market".
For most people it is the single most expensive asset they will ever own. Why is anything wrong, with that being a safe investment. Why would anyone want someone to lose money... their hard earned money on that.
 
Ha.

So it IS an investment.

Glad we got there
Are you asserting property shouldn't be an investment? As in there should be no financial gain whatsoever year on year?

Or are you saying some appreciation in value is acceptable?

If the latter, what limit would you suggest is put on any gains and how would that be administered?
 
Are you asserting property shouldn't be an investment? As in there should be no financial gain whatsoever year on year?

Or are you saying some appreciation in value is acceptable?

If the latter, what limit would you suggest is put on any gains and how would that be administered?
I'm saying stop denying it's an investment.
 
For most people it is the single most expensive asset they will ever own. Why is anything wrong, with that being a safe investment. Why would anyone want someone to lose money... their hard earned money on that.

No one is asserting that anyone should lose money.

But yours is a very selfish, short-term view.

Those of us that have kids, we naturally want to do what we can for them.
Safety and security, good morals, education, that sort of thing.

When helping out with their purchase of first house - using the bullshoite "value" yours has accumulated - becomes a necessity rather than a bonus, where does it logically end?

It's unsustainable.
 
Back
Top