Comments by "Terence Field" (@terencefield3204) on "UK housing market crash is "the end of the PONZI SCHEME" | Economics | The New Statesman" video.

Well as a Brit who, thank goodness, egrimated long ago, it was clear that the fraud of housing finance there has acted in a particular way. This is what has happened. The banks have created an asset class of real estate equivalent to bonds, but better. Bond prices move with the reciprocal of the rate, but housing does so when interest rates fall, but there is stickiness when they rise. This policy is deliberate, not accidental. Bankers employ the sharpest minds on the planet. AN example. After 2007/8, rates fell from about 7-8% down to .5-1.5%. A fall multiple of about 5-6 times. The cost to purchase real estate then rose by about 4 times. The monthly 'affordability' (social fraud calculation) declined. People then, at the margin, paid 4 x times the prior generation for real estate/ The property buyers thought, quite naively, (and were encouraged to do so!) about affordability per month, not their absurd indebtedness. NOW Rates are rising by about 400% to about 7% by next year. Thus mortgage holders on these inflated asset values will soon be paying gigantic interest charges where they have to refinance rates, on assets that will offer pitiful returns of capital value from now for the next 25 years, given the permanently ruined state of the British non-economy. Why did it happen? Most Gentiles are not taught to understand compound interest. They are economically illiterate in the majority. They have NO concept of value for money, intergenerational wealth, and are prey to a socialist state that removes almost all sense of personal responsibility, opportunity, indeed reality. A history of wide-spread ingrained poverty, lack of expectations, and their general level of education sets them as prey for clever rational well educated and opportunistic financiers The hard truth about impoverishment and slavery. In South London there is an agreeable suburb, built in the inter war period, by the name of Worcester Park. As one rides the train to the station there, a weathered sign on a shop building, there for over 50 years advertised that in that inter war period, a new house in Worcester Park could be purchased for about 250 pounds, with garage, 280 pounds. The mortgage was tax deductable with an appropriate endowment policy, which yielded a substantial gain at the end of the mortgage period. Not available now. Then the single male annual wage was of the order of 120-140 pounds per year. That is to say, a home there was priced at 2 x single male income. Male, since that is how a kinder society worked then. Now, that home is priced at in excess of 9 - 10 times single average 'wage'. Yet you are all told that you are better off than your grand-parents and great grand-parents. You are lied to, Wholesale. In effect, you are slaves if both of you have to take out whole-life mortgages for these little houses, and where you have the prospect of losing your home over that lifetime period if one of you becomes ill or dies. Thus, in real terms, in hard practical terms, you are enslaved. You have, functionally, no liberty. You have techno-junk, cheap, often quite poisonous food, Yet you are no-more free than a slave. You MUST work ALL the time or your domestic economy or completely collapses. And that is not slavery? Really? As a generality, Britian is a rentier economy. It has a dreadful housing stock, and as with all other aspects of British life, the grotesque price of all goods and services is a consequence of pitiful capitalisation, not infrequently sweated-labour hours and generalised, accelerating impoverishment. Yet you all deny the reality. Why? Can it simply be ignorance? No, something else is going on.
15
And your fellow citizens ( ? ) are progressively more impoverished. Does that suggest your actions lack any moral framework, and greed is all that drives you? or not? And if not, justify yourself.
11
You are entirely correct. The housing is in general dismal, unimaginative, of tedious style, small, corridor rooms, mean-ness of materials and finish, one has to pay an enormous amount of money to buy other than tatty depressing rubbish. The florid and ridiculous 'Estate Agent' ( Estates? some chance!!) florid descriptions add to the ridiculous Ruritanian atmosphere. Your decision to go was the right choice!!!
9
@jeffb7256 Where? IN the UK it s built on sand. Demand is only economic demand if finance at a tolerable cost can be found. And the UK is impoverishing.
4
@tcm81 lovely places, with sane societies. No names, no pack drill.
2
@tcm81 No no. I pay taxes and enjoy citizenship and am entirely compliant. As one should be.
2
@brynleytalbot778 Over 50 year cycles real estate lags stocks. That implies a massive correction over time given the potent effect of stock dividend reinvestment.
2
LOL The Sh^&show has un-ravelled since 1945, every year, more squalid, foul, mean, bitter and inhumane.
1
@stevenhull5025 The issue here is the UK. The slow acceptance of a definition of citizenship related to place, after the Imperial definition simply of Subjecthood and the decision to replicate the contents of a global empire in the confines of a tiny little island group of - until that point - VERY ancient monoculture was a LOCAL choice, added to by Amin Kenyata and the rest of the African dictators and the like. Similarly it was a LOCAL decision to add huge numbers by tolerating unlimited uncontrolled inward migration during the appalling horror of the Brown-Blair maladministrations. The acceptance of uncontrolled familial reunification from South Asia to Britian was a ridiculous LOCAL choice to make. Thus Britian is not any longer a European country, the monoculture not even a memory for most, and the levels of appalling sexual crimes and city violence, all but unreported by the propagandising media blanket rising and not confronted. LOCAL decisions. Europe has its own problems. It seems to handle them better than the Disunited KIngdom, and comfortably so.
1
@evertonfrancis640 What utility is there in taxing real estate as income? Explain please?
1
@tcm81 No no, It is simply my personal business. As your choice of location is yours.
1
@tcm81 Thank you for your question. No, I live in two countries, both republics, both full and sophisticated democracies, both with full protection of citizens under the law. I agree that most people live in oppressive conditions, under appalling abusive dictatorships. If the human population increases, as is projected, to well over 10.5 billions in a coming single human lifetime, with climate change ripping through agriculture, an form of sophisticated human social order, be it democratic or autocratic, will likely collapse as mass starvation and early death overtakes the peoples of a desertifying world. I hope you are content with the society in which you live.
1
@bluegtturbo YEs. Lemmings are idiotic. The cost of junk houses is sufficient of a failure there for all who bought in the last decade. The idiots.
1
@paulmessenger9836 That is not a real wealth yield. It is a transfer within the economy. Dividends reinvested are real growth in capital from real economic productive activity. And even taking into account rents yes the data is clear. Without rents, it shows real estate as an essentially passive component and not a wealth generator in any sense.
1
Of course the British are ignorant, exploited, naive, arrogant, unaware of anything that could aid them. When was it other?
1