Dog Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 [quote user="Russethouse"] Oh come on, think it through, in a age where councils have stopped providing anywhere near enough homes for those that cannot buy or do not want to, and housing associations can't keep up with demand, private landlords have a role to play - they are not a charity, and no, I'm not a private landlord.At least they take the risk with their own money, not other peoples.[/quote] You are misinformed - take Leicester for instance - they have 300 empty houses council houses and will give 50% of cost to refurbish them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 Really - and is there work there ? May be of interest to those families forced to live in B&Bs while they wait for a home, in other areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dog Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 [quote user="Russethouse"]Really - and is there work there ? May be of interest to those families forced to live in B&Bs while they wait for a home, in other areas.[/quote]I have no idea check your local job center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 [quote user="Russethouse"]At least they take the risk with their own money, not other peoples.[/quote]Does this include those landlords that let to tenants on housing benefit - at the tax payers cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillan Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 Will Goodwin keep his pension, yes he will, no he won't, yes he will. Reading the online news reports today it seems Harriot Harman QC PM has said he's not going to keep it on national TV at the weekend. It's a shame that she didn't ask her illustrious leader before opening his mouth as he has serious doubts that they can do anything about it even through a court of law. As GB said in and interview with Talk Sport (why Talk Sport!) and repeated in the Torygraph today that "Of course, if it came to a court of law we would be legally bound by the contracts that have been entered in to."Some think that Harmens comments were an attempt to out smart GB and that she has the intention to run against him for the leadership at some time in the future. I wonder how caring she will be about the working class, I mean this is the woman who seldom ever goes out in her constituency (Peckham) to meet those that voted for her without wearing a knife proof vest (April 2008).I suspect Goodwin is keeping his head down and hoping his pension will be forgotten about while these two slog it out.More bad news today I see, HSBC loosing a shed load and asking their shareholders to bail them out. Sadly it just resulted in the stock markets dropping to their lowest point since the start of the Gulf War. Just to cheer us all up the boss of HSBC has said things may get even worse in 2009. So I guess that's mine and everyone else's pension pot halved in value yet again.Personally I wouldn't worry about 'The Brotherhood' to whom Dog eludes. I mean who is it exactly that leaves the office lights on in Canary Wharf (One Canada Place ) in a certain pattern so that from the distance it looks like one of the secret signs of the Illuminati. Incidentally the same building is also known as "The Illuminati Pyramid " and is supposed to be one for their secret headquarters from where they run the world. Obviously not very good at it or so it would seem. I thought I would throw that in as I am sure some conspiracy theorists will turn up soon and say its all plot to take over the worldBy the way reading through and catching up on the posts I loved Normans tongue in cheek wheeze about "stealing from the children of their county of birth" and the fact that one or two fell for it. I mean it was a joke wasn't it? Go on Norman tell them it was a joke. I mean nobody of any intelligence could possibly write such tripe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mint Posted March 2, 2009 Author Share Posted March 2, 2009 I couldn't believe it when that Harman woman came out with such utter rubbish.Of course, if the deal was agreed, etc, it has to be honoured. And, of course, you can't just change the law willy-nilly, just because you don't like something you'd agreed to. Retrospective legislation? Don't be ridiculous!I stand by what I said earlier. I don't think the banker should have to give up his pension. In his place, I certainly WOULDN'T! It was all legal and above board. If I wanted to, I'd take the money and write cheques to my favourite charities and get the tax advantages. I mean, I'd certainly give Christine Animal some money for a start![:D]They are just making the guy a scapegoat so as to draw attention from their own incompetence. On the other hand, they could have made a deal with the guy. He gets his pension and takes the flak and the government gets let off the hook?Cynical, moi? Mais non.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clair Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 [quote user="sweet 17"]They are just making the guy a scapegoat so as to draw attention from their own incompetence.[/quote]I said the very same thing on page 2 of this thread.It's all very convenient, it focuses the taxpayers' wrath and gives a face to the "irresponsible bankers". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mint Posted March 2, 2009 Author Share Posted March 2, 2009 Sorry, Clair, Page 2 was a long time ago.! But, I have re-read your post and you are spot on!As for the chap himself, what I'll say is, "Bully for him". Look, I'll take the flak if they'd give me his pension........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dog Posted March 2, 2009 Share Posted March 2, 2009 Quillan spill the beans about your brothers Gordon Brown and Fred Goodwin which lodges are they in? It's all preprepared how else do people like Goodwin shuffle between jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillan Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 I was wondering, after the recent revelations about Lloyd's Bank and the government now owning so much of them will they (the chairman etc) stay or will they go and what contracts have they got?Does this now mean that anyone who owes them money does not have to pay anything back on the basis that in reality, if they are a UK tax payer, they only owe the money to themselves.Isn't there something about a shareholders loan, rather like a directors loan, where you can claim tax relief on the interest or is that just wishful thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 I think it would be difficult for the government to require any of the Lloyds directors to resign as the primary reason for their current difficulties was the white knight acquisition of HBOS - strongly 'encouraged' by both the government and the FSA in an effort to prevent the collapse of HBOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russethouse Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Just about to say the same, but since the Government seemed to 'bend' it's own rules to 'support' this merger I think the person or people who should go are either the Chancellor or Prime Minister........I'm not holding my breath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now