Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
InsiderTrader
06 Mar 18 12:18
Joined:
Date Joined: 25 Aug 05
| Topic/replies: 14,569 | Blogger: InsiderTrader's blog
I have always been concerned about how you incentivize people to create wealth without coercion if you do not allow people do make a profit and be better off than those who do not put the effort in.

However the system we are currently in where the Globalist elites control most of the resources and governments and the EU puts tariffs on the poorest countries driving their people into the sea is not working.

A system where the corporations are too big to fail and career CEOs go from one company to another sacking workers and pocketing the profits while the workers are on minimum wages is not working.

A system where students have to pay £9k a year to do some rubbish university course that will never give them a jobs that could pay it off it not working.

A system where foreign gamblers have pockets billions of pounds on our infrastructure of water and power whilst our bills have gone up is not working.

A system where the richest farmers and international businesses have pocked billions in 'green' subsidies whilst our bills have all gone up is not working.

A system where the state has sold all the housing to greedy landlords who have pushed up housing costs for all is not working. Interest rates have had to remain low to support the debt of these gamblers and the young now face an impossible task of buying a home and savers and pension funds have lost billions of pounds.

A system where the bankers are also too big to fail and are bailed out with tax payers moneys is also not working. The banking system should be working mutually for everyone and not collapse when the bankers bets go wrong. They still get their bonuses and disability funding, social care and so on is paying the price for their  bankers losing bets.

Socialism can work if done right. These two videos show it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k79wCaFgU40

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZvAvNJL-gE
Pause Switch to Standard View I am starting to consider that...
Show More
Loading...
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:32 PM GMT
if house prises are falling, then again less incentive to invest in property. For many landlords it is the possibility of house price increases that is more important than rental income
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:35 PM GMT
landlords and buy to let is merely the symptom of house price increases ,not the cause
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 5:37 PM GMT
lfc1971
07 Mar 18 17:29
Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 20,251 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
IT, its true that if landlords are taxed too heavily they will probably choose or have to sell, but this means less available properties to rent and may just as likely mean higher rents rather than lower, I don't know

^

Who do they sell to? Or do they just magically disappear and no one lives in them?
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 5:38 PM GMT
lfc1971
07 Mar 18 17:32
Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 20,252 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
if house prises are falling, then again less incentive to invest in property. For many landlords it is the possibility of house price increases that is more important than rental income

^

If house prices were cut in half tomorrow yields would double. They would be buyers.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:38 PM GMT
of course they will sell them or leave them empty, whatever. That doesn't matter
Report Injera March 7, 2018 5:39 PM GMT
A question i've asked before on here: why doesn't the govt buy up existing property and rent it out?
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:39 PM GMT
yes that's true if the rental yield is good there is no problem, as long as house prices don't fall
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:42 PM GMT
you see if you are getting a good rental yield on your property that's one thing, but property is work and costs money, and if property prices fall quickly, or even slowly its a very long haul to consider, a lot of years and effort and trouble
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 5:44 PM GMT
Injera
07 Mar 18 17:39
Joined: 04 Jan 03
| Topic/replies: 12,195 | Blogger: Injera's blog
A question i've asked before on here: why doesn't the govt buy up existing property and rent it out?

^

Because they know it is a bubble that they are trying to keep inflated with help to buy, emergency interest rates and so on. They would potentially get into massive negative equity.

Much cheaper as the government to buy farmland and then give itself planning permission and build.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:44 PM GMT
the thing that makes it palatable for most landlords is the prospect of maybe 10,15 years investing in property and then getting out,
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 5:49 PM GMT
lfc1971
07 Mar 18 17:44
Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 20,256 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
the thing that makes it palatable for most landlords is the prospect of maybe 10,15 years investing in property and then getting out,

^

'palatable'?? Those who got in early have trebled their money and had their debts paid off by renters.

They gambled and won. They do not need protection now.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:50 PM GMT
that's the market, nothing to do with landlords
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:53 PM GMT
they are providing a service, and it is something that cannot be provided by the gov or social housing in the modern world
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 5:55 PM GMT
lfc1971
07 Mar 18 17:50
Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 20,257 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
that's the market, nothing to do with landlords

^

Are you seriously trying claim the demand from landlords who had tax advantages over owner-occupiers has not driven up prices.

In 1999 there were 50,000 BTL mortgages. Now around 2 million.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:56 PM GMT
in the modern world and in Britain people need to be mobile, that means renting and that kind of mobility cannot be provided by social housing, that worked in the past when people worked in the same job and the same place for 40 years
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:57 PM GMT
there are not 2 million buy to let landlords in Britain, I would think
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 5:58 PM GMT
mortgages ? so what,the tax on buy to let has been addressed
it may mean higher rents
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 5:58 PM GMT
lfc1971
07 Mar 18 17:56
Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 20,259 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
in the modern world and in Britain people need to be mobile, that means renting and that kind of mobility cannot be provided by social housing, that worked in the past when people worked in the same job and the same place for 40 years

^

Over 90% of renting families do not move areas and would like longer tenancies.

Young people have always moved around. Before 1930s most houses were private rented. Nothing to do with 'modern world'.
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 6:00 PM GMT
lfc1971
07 Mar 18 17:58
Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 20,261 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
mortgages ? so what,the tax on buy to let has been addressed
it may mean higher rents

^

Rents are charged on supply and demand (and helped by housing benefit). If they could charge more they would already be charging.

No increases in rents due to recent tax changes.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:01 PM GMT
yes people would like longer tenancies of course, for security.But my point is the modern world is not secure,it is less secure than in the past. That is the modern world
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:03 PM GMT
yes they will charge what they can, if they are taxed too heavily they will have to sell
meaning less available properties to rent, meaning higher rents
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 6:03 PM GMT
Much more protections in now than pre-war. Things were much more uncertain then.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:06 PM GMT
nope, anyone born pre war, at the time of WW2 and after saw the greatest increase in prosperity and security and opportunity of any generation in history
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 6:09 PM GMT
I am talking about families 1850-1930 when the private rented sector was much bigger than it is now.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:11 PM GMT
and what point are you making about then, could the average person afford to buy his own home?
or were many millions never able to buy a home
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 6:13 PM GMT
Yes similar situation to now where millions will never be able to afford a family home.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:15 PM GMT
I disagree, it is perfectly within the average persons reach to buy a home, millions of young people do just that from all social classes throughout Britain
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:16 PM GMT
so it is different to then , not the same
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 6:20 PM GMT
Home owners in the UK

16-24
1991 36%
2014  9%

25-34
1991 66%
2014 34%

And the numbers have got worse the last 3 years.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:23 PM GMT
did 50% of young people in 1990 go to university, did they fail to start work until they were almost 30? I don't know
take a look at that, and there are other factors you might want to consider when you look at how many young people can buy a home
But one of the most important things is that they are working
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:25 PM GMT
you see if you are a young couple and you leave school at 16, and work hard
Don't worry you will be able to afford a home by the time you are 20
Report donny osmond March 7, 2018 6:28 PM GMT
price of house in 1990 compared to today more of a factor

and 95-100% mortgages

twas simple in 1990 to buy a house, despite super high interest rates
...possibly because of them?
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 6:29 PM GMT
House prices have gone up 4 fold. Starting salaries in graduate jobs like accountancy have gone up around 50%.

A graduate starting could have got 20k salary and got a flat in north london for 60k.

Now earn 30k and similar flat around 600k+.

They would be the lucky ones. A lot of graduates end up close to min wage.

Wages have not kept pace with prices.
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 6:30 PM GMT
And the graduate now have 50k plus extra debt.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:31 PM GMT
I don't think we can blame landlords for the price of property in london
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:32 PM GMT
billions of pounds every year are spent on propping up the London housing market
thats our money by the way
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:34 PM GMT
buy to let is the symptom, not the cause
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 6:35 PM GMT
I dont blame landlords. I blame the protections they and current owners are given by the state to keep prices high.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:37 PM GMT
they are not keeping prices high imo, they are reacting to high prices caused by the government and government policy
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:39 PM GMT
you don't solve the problem by taxing landlords
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 6:44 PM GMT
Level the tax playing field with owner occupiers, put up interest rates and build more houses.
Report Injera March 7, 2018 6:50 PM GMT
InsiderTrader 07 Mar 18 18:29
House prices have gone up 4 fold. Starting salaries in graduate jobs like accountancy have gone up around 50%.

A graduate starting could have got 20k salary and got a flat in north london for 60k.

Now earn 30k and similar flat around 600k+.

They would be the lucky ones. A lot of graduates end up close to min wage.

Wages have not kept pace with prices.


...This. It's a car crash.Sad
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:52 PM GMT
people have to make a profit, landlords, builders, land owners , everyone
that's life
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:53 PM GMT
too many graduates, that's why they are on minimum wage
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 6:55 PM GMT
if they are a plumber or a bricklayer don't worry they will be able to buy a home
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 7:02 PM GMT
the cost of a house in London? that doesn't bother me, millions of people living in London do not pay for their home
someone else does, that's the problem
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 7:04 PM GMT
The average Bricklayer salary is £35,260.

You might be offered between £99,680 and £149,520 mortgage

Where can you buy a family home for that?
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 7:04 PM GMT
25 year mortgage.
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 7:07 PM GMT
that's about the price for a semi detached home in most areas of Britain, a little less you don't need to pay the asking price in todays market, prices are falling
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 7:09 PM GMT
if you are a bricklayer or plumber you could have it paid off in 15 years perhaps less
of course take a 25 year mortgage, but pay it off early
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 7:11 PM GMT
that's you sitting mortgage free after 15 years, you might consider a little buy to let property also then
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 7:12 PM GMT
you have to work hard, of course
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 7:13 PM GMT
I guess if you can get work locally.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-70363721.html
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 7:14 PM GMT
Nice 2 bed here for 139k

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-64192528.html
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 7:15 PM GMT
Or lay bricks for 25 years to own half of this:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-52038954.html
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 7:25 PM GMT
the price of housing in Britain is dependent on the market and government policy
if you have millions of people living in houses, who are not paying for those houses
and we have, there are millions in London alone
then that means that prices will increase ,
because prices always increase when it is someone elses money and no one, and everyone, is paying that money
but nevertheless this cannot continue forever, eventually prices in London will have to fall
and elsewhere also
Report lfc1971 March 7, 2018 7:31 PM GMT
as it is today most people in work, be they builders or plumbers or office workers whatever
can afford fairly comfortably to buy their own home
That is the reality, that is what happens in every town and city in every part of Britain
But it is good to get into work young, not leave school when you are almost 30
that is the fundamental problem, its surprising who much a young couple who work can save
It gives them a head start on the timewasters and those who moan they cant afford a house
No wonder they should have been working for the previous 10 years or more
Report InsiderTrader March 7, 2018 7:39 PM GMT
I suppose they could be a tiny place somewhere eventually.

But you see to miss the point.

Prices have gone up way more than wages.

Young people cannot afford to buy similar properties that people doing the same job 20 years ago could buy.
Report treetop March 7, 2018 8:46 PM GMT
Is that true I.T ? My first attempt 40 years ago needed us to save a deposit then struggle with little social life and second hand furniture for 5 years. It hasn't been easy but I used to show young kids around empty houses for a while before retiring and lost count of the number that wanted a 3-4 bed roomed house,new furniture and a good car on the drive while spending £100 every saturday night on the quayside on drinks,a curry and a taxi home.Perhaps the young have to make a few sacrifices for a new house too.
Report donny osmond March 7, 2018 9:01 PM GMT
thats the point treetop you could do that and buy a house, do a ton saturday, and a nifty on sunday
and still pay the mortgage, do monday night cheap trebles, and start again thursday , friday, and mortgage
wa never a problem

now its a bedsit in a rundown part of town and scrimping and saving like you did 40 years ago
Report treetop March 7, 2018 10:08 PM GMT
Bollox donny, you couldn't gamble like that back then and get on the property ladder,what planet were you living on ? Of course all you Gosforth types had the bank of daddy to get you started !
Report donny osmond March 7, 2018 10:27 PM GMT
of the smell of bitterness, dear oh dear

i never mentioned gambling dunno where you got that from either
Report treetop March 7, 2018 10:42 PM GMT
Doing a ton must mean something different to your good self ?
Report donny osmond March 7, 2018 10:43 PM GMT
you wrote about it in your post

or did somebody else have control for that one ?
Report treetop March 7, 2018 10:47 PM GMT
Nah, just read it again and offer my apologies but it can apply to some young kids I have met ! My night life is far more ordinary !
Report donny osmond March 7, 2018 10:52 PM GMT
there was so much more disposable income in them days treetop, and we thought things
could only get better, ...how wrong we were

todays youngsters have it super tough compared to us

they really need bank of mam and dad , and to save whilst at home on free rent !!!
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 8:19 AM GMT
treetop
07 Mar 18 20:46
Joined: 01 Jun 01
| Topic/replies: 15,441 | Blogger: treetop's blog
Is that true I.T ? My first attempt 40 years ago needed us to save a deposit then struggle with little social life and second hand furniture for 5 years. It hasn't been easy but I used to show young kids around empty houses for a while before retiring and lost count of the number that wanted a 3-4 bed roomed house,new furniture and a good car on the drive while spending £100 every saturday night on the quayside on drinks,a curry and a taxi home.Perhaps the young have to make a few sacrifices for a new house too.

^

In 1970 the average annual wage was £1664 and average house price was £4975 and university was free.
In 2018 the average annual wage is £26624 and average house price is £224353 and kids pay £27,000 for uni.

In 1970 you could buy an average house with 2.99 years wages.
In 2018 you can buy an average house with 8.42 years wages.
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 8:47 AM GMT
interest rates?
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 8:50 AM GMT
you see you have to understand why the average house price was lower, for a the lending was based on the average working mans wage, not two wages.
And was based on working man, not someone not working
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 8:52 AM GMT
Meaningless to compare the two things, totally different countries
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 8:57 AM GMT
fc1971
08 Mar 18 08:50
Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 20,287 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
you see you have to understand why the average house price was lower, for a the lending was based on the average working mans wage, not two wages.

^

3 points to debunk your lies:

1. Average number of people in a household is 60% of what it was in 1960.
2. In 1991 (after women started to work) average wage was £14040 and average house prices was £53523 (ratio 3.82).
3. Interest rates were 3.38% in 1960. It is only since 2009 they have been on emergency rates which was after the big rise in prices.
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:02 AM GMT
now in 1970 that meant someone, a man,  buying a house with a family, possibly 3 or 4 children had to pay the mortgage for that house out of his own wage, very often the mother did not have a job the only income was the single wage
And the other everyday expences had to be paid, and a family raised out of that small wage, not just the mortgage
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 9:05 AM GMT
IN 1970 53% of women worked. In 2010 when house prices were near there peak it was around 64%.

It is a myth that barely any women worked in 1970.
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:05 AM GMT
ah we are back to 1960 now, of course interest rates were something like 20% in the 1970s, yes at times
average no of people in a household greater then than now? of coursev that is part of the problem
Women starting to work? all these things take time to filter through, it doesn't happen overnight it takes time
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:09 AM GMT
IT 53% of women worked, biut that was when they were single, that was when they had first married , that was at certain times but generally when they were married and had children and were raising a family it was probably much less , maybe 10% whatever, that would be a more accurate picture of the average family in Britain
We are not talking about single women,you might say 100% of them worked, so what
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:12 AM GMT
The category we are talking about then compared to now is women with families, and usually married
That was the norm, not now
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:14 AM GMT
What is bringing the percentage of working women down somewhat now if you want to compare like with like, now there are far more single mothers not in the workplace, that alone skews your percentages
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:17 AM GMT
So to put it bluntly, even if in 1970 53% of women were working, it depends who these women were and were they buying a house, or living in a house by themselves, or with children
That is the relevant percentages in relation to house prices
Which is what we are talking about

thee is no point quoting percentages if you don't understand percentages
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 9:20 AM GMT
lfc1971
08 Mar 18 09:05
Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 20,293 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
ah we are back to 1960 now, of course interest rates were something like 20% in the 1970s, yes at times

^

More lies. Do you not realise all your comments can be checked? Interest rates have never been 20%. Savers got a max of around 9%. Over a 25 year mortgage you could not possibily say what rates will be when buying a house. Buying now at low rates does not mean they could not be double digits in 10 years time.
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 9:22 AM GMT
lfc1971
08 Mar 18 09:14
Joined: 06 Nov 11
| Topic/replies: 20,294 | Blogger: lfc1971's blog
What is bringing the percentage of working women down somewhat now if you want to compare like with like, now there are far more single mothers not in the workplace, that alone skews your percentages

^

Indeed there are 3 million lone parent households now what makes a nonsense of your 2 people in the mortgage comments.
Report unitedbiscuits March 8, 2018 9:23 AM GMT
Many of us have inflated Council Tax demands thudding onto our welcome mats.

This is a tax-raising instrument ripe for reform. To start with, the proceeds are spent on services that protect the environment around the property; and it makes more sense for owners to take responsibility for that. But we could make the measure even more popular by doubling the liabilities for  empty or rented property and reducing Council Tax for genuine single home owners.

A solution that is fairer for everyone.
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:23 AM GMT
now back then when the family had been raised often themother would go back to work
But of course by that time the husband may have had a rise in wages, perhaps a promotion or a better job, it would be 10 or 15 years after they had bought their house and house prices would have risen
But they didn't  have to worry about that, they had bought their house earlier, much earlier
when it was cheaper, when todays generation are still in school
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 9:23 AM GMT
Just to be clear are you seriously trying to claim housing is as affordable now as it was in the 70s, 80s and 90s?
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:24 AM GMT
if a property is left empty that is entirely up to the owner of that property , no one else
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:25 AM GMT
housing is not as affordable, that is because of the nature of the country, its a different country no point trying to compare
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:27 AM GMT
there is something beautiful about owning an empty property, something consoling
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 9:30 AM GMT
Ok 1971. Clearly the situation has changed. That is the whole point I am making.
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:32 AM GMT
IT single mothers do not make a nonsense of my 2 person mortgage and bills
The single mother is most often, not always, not paying for the house
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:34 AM GMT
yes but you fail to realise why it has changed, you don't even seem to understand that in your point about single mothers...its this simple they are not paying for their house, someone else is this makes housing dearer not cheaper
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 9:51 AM GMT
Of course they cannot afford as prices as so high. You keep saying the same nonsense without providing any data to back it up.

Interest rates - not relevant as can change alot over 25 years.
Two people working - does not explain 3X earnings to 8.5X earnings.

You ignore the elephants in the room. Massive population rise, social housing not replaced, not enough new houses build, government policies to keep prices from ever falling.
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 9:53 AM GMT
And to say youth today are not in a worse situation is wrong. Now both parents have to work to have a chance. When less women worked (or only one parent worked) there was more time for looking after the family and bringing up kids. Now it is both work just to pay the rent.
Report lfc1971 March 8, 2018 9:54 AM GMT
I have explained all that already IT, no point going over it again
Report InsiderTrader March 8, 2018 10:06 AM GMT
You have explained nothing. You have presented zero facts.
Report Dr Crippen March 9, 2018 10:35 AM GMT
When has there been a time when prospective house buyers have not complained about house prices?

I remember plenty of threads here on politics in the early years of Betfair about the unaffordability of houses for working people.
That was under Labour who at the time were awash with money and were in a position to do something about the housing shortage.

So what did labour do? They sent out search parties looking for immigrants to bring back and make the housing crisis worse.
And anyone who pointed out their folly was called a racist.
Report Dr Crippen March 9, 2018 10:43 AM GMT
One way to encourage house building is to completely restore the mortgage tax relief for landlords especially those who buy new builds.

Also licence tenants, to encourage easier access for tenants to properties where landlords are reluctant to let to benefit claimers.
Any bad behaviour will be recorded on a database.
Then the renter has only to flash their licence for the landlord to refer to the database and easily clear them for past misconduct.
That would take some of the load off councils to house them.
Report ufcdan March 9, 2018 1:00 PM GMT
Columbia and Venezuela are a point in hand regarding the bad in both systems. Venezuela has so much resources but hasn't given their wealth away, so much oil but very little return. It's own citizens paying next to nothing for it yet the hospitals with no supplies then there Columbia where the corporations hired gangs to kill off farmers.............was it for oil ? No fxxking bananas Crazy
Report InsiderTrader March 9, 2018 1:26 PM GMT
Dr Crippen
09 Mar 18 10:43
Joined: 16 Apr 02
| Topic/replies: 32,278 | Blogger: Dr Crippen's blog
One way to encourage house building is to completely restore the mortgage tax relief for landlords especially those who buy new builds.

^

Giving BTLers even more tax breaks than they aready have over potential owner occupiers will result in prices going up not down. It would make the current bubble even worse.
Report xmoneyx March 9, 2018 1:42 PM GMT
scottish labour spell founding member keir hardie wrong party conference - Dundee

keir hardy ExcitedCry
Report flushgordon1 March 10, 2018 11:32 AM GMT
Keir stammer?
Report Dr Crippen March 10, 2018 11:41 AM GMT
Giving BTLers even more tax breaks than they aready have over potential owner occupiers will result in prices going up not down. It would make the current bubble even worse.

Well I'm afraid you've have to put up the worsening situation we've got then IT.
Because without expanding the housing stock you're going nowhere fast.
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com