news & politics:discussion

[Neil]

20 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Didn't social housing just get replaced by private landlords?

To a large extent that's what happened but they didn't buy the houses for landlordism but instead because of accepting the Tory bribe of a cheap house often it was kids helping their folks buy the council houses their parents lived in.

 

[Neil]

3 hours ago, mattiloy said:

About f**king time. Not sure if the crumbs dropping from the table are so sparse that I’m imagining it, but I want to believe that it sounds like there is emotion in his voice here. Like its what he really thought all along. One can only hope. That being one of the world’s biggest c**ts is just an act and behind it lies a heart of gold, as his supporters would have us believe. I guess we’ll find out .

It's a clever comment to buy some detractors off and it's working.by recognising there won't be a Palestinian state unless the Palestinians want one.

[cellar]

1 hour ago, mattiloy said:

 

He said he had the house 25 years in a previous post so thats what I used as the term. Then yeah I was vague with the exact % but I didnt expect so much scrutiny ☺️.

Haha yeah sorry I am quite particular (it was 20 years - I checked, he bought in 2004).

But yes, I do think a properly diversified portfolio is a preferable way to invest than just lumping in for property (not to be taken as advice by anyone reading this).

Also I don't particularly agree with the statement "If some companies in your fund go bad, you're still making 10% per year," although I'm going down a bit of a rabbit hole so maybe should just call it there.

[Neil]

53 minutes ago, mattiloy said:

Landlordism is a problem not because of individual landlords but because of the way that it diminishes housing supply which ends up driving up both house prices for purchasers, and somewhat paradoxically eventually rents:

As a fairly stable long term trend of demand outstripping supply becomes apparent, manifested in increasing prices, it becomes more attractive to new BTL landlords - but the property prices have already gone up and therefore they need to charge higher rents to achieve the same yield that covers their mortgage costs - and then they too take another potential first time buyer home off the market (BTL properties are overwhelming those that would otherwise be first time buyer properties). This restricts supply further which puts property prices up which attracts new BTL guys, who pay the new price and get an even bigger mortgage with even bigger costs to cover etc etc etc

This grim spiral is only true in a system where new housing stock is inadequate to bridge the initial supply gap (as in much of the uk). In a system where new housing stock is adequate, the initial trend would never have been established, so the expectation of never ending house price rises would not be there and there would not have been a big BTL craze.

It doesn't deminish housing supply the house is still supplied to someone in need of a house.in the absence of the renter being able to buy the renter still gets somewhere to live. Its a method to distribute resources 

[Neil]

Take the landlord out of your narrow thinking and the guy who can't afford to buy is homeless 

[Neil]

my thoughts with snoop's daughter who's suffered a stroke.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68027972

[clarkete]

3 hours ago, mattiloy said:

 

He said he had the house 25 years in a previous post so thats what I used as the term. Then yeah I was vague with the exact % but I didnt expect so much scrutiny ☺️.

The risk is small, but your exposure is 100%. If your one asset goes bad, your whole retirement is f**ked. If some companies in your fund go bad, you’re still getting 10 odd % a year. Thats the difference. It is good fortune alone that has rewarded B2L landlords in the 21st century, nobody could have foreseen such a prolonged housing bubble. But that fortune is on the wane. House prices have underperformed vs the market in recent years and are forecast to underperform vs the market in the mid term.

Just on the financials it doesnt make sense. But we agree I think that on top of that landlordism is grotesque.

Overall, if your financial advisor at any point said put all your money into B2L - you’d be best off getting a new financial advisor.

The poster is lucky not to be much out of pocket if at all in monetary terms but if you billed all the hours spent managing the property, maintenance and the eventual costs associated with liquidating the assets, I think funds wins all day. And again, you dont have to live with being a landlord.

You've ignored the tax advantages that were in place during those twenty years that helped to lure so many of the btl people into the market...  Eg from 2011.

"You will, however, be able to offset mortgage interest payments, letting agency costs and maintenance expenses against the taxable rental income.

This makes it more tax-efficient to have a mortgage on your investment property rather than your main home where you can no longer get tax relief on your mortgage."

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-1585128/Tax-buy-let-pay-less.html

On the other side of the coin, I have a contractor  friend whose pension was very much based on stocks in one form or another, but a couple of bad years in the markets postponed his retirement plans for a while. 

[steviewevie]

I have an stocks/shares ISA thing because I am such a high roller and like to diversify my portfolio or something...anyway, it isn't really making much money, infact appears to be going down. Might stick it all on the lottery tonight.

[lost]

The issue with living in the UK is most people buy the FTSE without thinking about it. The problem with that is if you look over the last 20 years the U.K and Europes share of global GDP has plummeted since China and India signed up to the WTO. The U.S on the other hand has kept theirs mainly due to all the tech giants being American companies.

Its one of those things that if you are buying trackers you have needed some diversification into countries that have not been getting poorer and with us being in the internet age, the big tech stocks.

Edited January 20 by lost

[cellar]

31 minutes ago, lost said:

The issue with living in the UK is most people buy the FTSE without thinking about it. The problem with that is if you look over the last 20 years the U.K and Europes share of global GDP has plummeted since China and India signed up to the WTO. The U.S on the other hand has kept theirs mainly due to all the tech giants being American companies.

Its one of those things that if you are buying trackers you have needed some diversification into countries that have not been getting poorer and with us being in the internet age, the big tech stocks.

There are so many companies that provide funds of funds with low entry requirements and low OCFs that I don't understand why people try to do it themselves (although I guess it could just be down to now knowing about them). Unless it is just the thrill of the punt and they're happy to lose it all.

[Guest]

 

[lost]

13 minutes ago, cellar said:

There are so many companies that provide funds of funds with low entry requirements and low OCFs that I don't understand why people try to do it themselves (although I guess it could just be down to now knowing about them). Unless it is just the thrill of the punt and they're happy to lose it all.

I can remember the advice pre-2000 and that was invest in the country you reside in, as you'll be spending your retirement there it reduces currency risk.

Thats been terrible advice the last 20 years and I'm guessing explains people reporting back wildly different performance. The FTSE was 6930 in 1999, its now 7461. nowhere near the 10% YOY returns people here are reporting back.

As I said thats mainly because we are in the internet age, there used to be European companies that dominated certain sectors, they are all American now and so if say you've been holding debenhams shares over amazon for retail because your tracker is based on Uk companies you've been having a bad time.

Edited January 20 by lost

[steviewevie]

Netanyahu running out of friends at home and abroad.

 

[stuie]

16 hours ago, mattiloy said:

And you never have to admit you are, or have been, a landlord.

Oh are you still going on about my one accidental btl property? I’m not embarrassed mate, I would be if I’d surrendered it in the crash. I would be if I was charging market rent for a shithole. I would be if I got to retirement without a plan. 

 

[cellar]

4 hours ago, lost said:

I can remember the advice pre-2000 and that was invest in the country you reside in, as you'll be spending your retirement there it reduces currency risk.

Thats been terrible advice the last 20 years and I'm guessing explains people reporting back wildly different performance. The FTSE was 6930 in 1999, its now 7461. nowhere near the 10% YOY returns people here are reporting back.

As I said thats mainly because we are in the internet age, there used to be European companies that dominated certain sectors, they are all American now and so if say you've been holding debenhams shares over amazon for retail because your tracker is based on Uk companies you've been having a bad time.

Pre-2000 is way before my time, but yeah, getting a good split of assets (including geographic, and to an extent, cap split) is just the way, backed up with studies. Longer time horizon and attitude to risk allows you to play around with equity exposure.

10.6% annual returns is mega really, typically if you're getting 5%+ without taking on too much risk I'd say that's pretty solid. Or it was, with inflation where it is its not so super. And the problem is that its harder to take on risk when you have less money. Lots of variables (including investor behaviour, another kettle of fish).

[cellar]

9 minutes ago, stuie said:

Oh are you still going on about my one accidental btl property? I’m not embarrassed mate, I would be if I’d surrendered it in the crash. I would be if I was charging market rent for a shithole. I would be if I got to retirement without a plan. 

 

As it goes, thinking about your situation did make me reflect on how I see my own principles. If I ended up in the same position as you, I'm not sure I can say for sure how I would react. I don't have any property so I can't claim to understand what that feels like personally.

I still find it hard to justify in my head having a renter cover all of the cost of a mortgage payment (particularly the interest), so if I could afford to (and if I ever had a property to let), I'd like to think I would still be paying some of the cost of the mortgage to help my tenants get a better deal. But there's always another expense, I suppose.

In the end, your real life trumps theorising on a message board, so I just want to say I didn't intend any hard feelings in discussing your situation, just so happened you provided numbers which made it an easy example to use!

[stuie]

58 minutes ago, cellar said:

As it goes, thinking about your situation did make me reflect on how I see my own principles. If I ended up in the same position as you, I'm not sure I can say for sure how I would react. I don't have any property so I can't claim to understand what that feels like personally.

I still find it hard to justify in my head having a renter cover all of the cost of a mortgage payment (particularly the interest), so if I could afford to (and if I ever had a property to let), I'd like to think I would still be paying some of the cost of the mortgage to help my tenants get a better deal. But there's always another expense, I suppose.

In the end, your real life trumps theorising on a message board, so I just want to say I didn't intend any hard feelings in discussing your situation, just so happened you provided numbers which made it an easy example to use!

It’s quite interesting to have the conversation to be honest. Some of my friends don’t know and I know they’d have similar viewpoints as mattiloy. 

It’s not gone unnoticed by me either and I’ve had to make peace with it, I am left leaning (still trying to square that circle!) and I understand the problems with the housing market. 

That said, the house is nicely renovated and the rent is much lower than it could be, so I’m happy and the tenant and her boys are happy in a nice home too. 

 

[Neil]

2 hours ago, cellar said:

Pre-2000 is way before my time, but yeah, getting a good split of assets (including geographic, and to an extent, cap split) is just the way, backed up with studies. Longer time horizon and attitude to risk allows you to play around with equity exposure.

10.6% annual returns is mega really, typically if you're getting 5%+ without taking on too much risk I'd say that's pretty solid. Or it was, with inflation where it is its not so super. And the problem is that its harder to take on risk when you have less money. Lots of variables (including investor behaviour, another kettle of fish).

Asia was the future for investing until asian shares turned to junk.around the same time many internet shares turned to junk.these wiped out many peoples stick market investments. And people tend to forget these when singing about stock market investing 

Edited January 20 by Neil

[Guest]

 

[steviewevie]

41 minutes ago, Neil said:

Asia was the future for investing until asian shares turned to junk.around the same time many internet shares turned to junk.these wiped out many peoples stick market investments. And people tend to forget these when singing about stock market investing 

Massive AI bubble burst just round the corner.

[steviewevie]

 

[steviewevie]

 

[Neil]

41 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

 

someone should have distracted corbyn.

[Neil]

8 hours ago, steviewevie said:

Netanyahu running out of friends at home and abroad.

 

same as how the Palestinians ran out of friends when they ditched the two state solution.

[cellar]

1 hour ago, Neil said:

Asia was the future for investing until asian shares turned to junk.around the same time many internet shares turned to junk.these wiped out many peoples stick market investments. And people tend to forget these when singing about stock market investing 

I guess that's the point of diversifying - don't overexpose yourself to any particular asset or region. Dot-com bubble burst had a similar impact on the FTSE to Covid right? (I suppose I could check but I'm lazy) - but well diversified funds didn't crumble because of Covid, although I know they took hits (not as much as a FTSE tracker though).

I know that before the big Covid impact in March 2020, companies were already repositioning to reduce exposure and mitigate any potential losses.