Primorolo, Sterilise British Schhoolgirls http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/ne…

This man thinks he Knows what they are up to, and he should do. http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865

Asset prices can go up and well as down. It's even written in the small print of all these shared equity schemes the government are touting.

I understand this fact, why can't homeowners. I've made a few bad bets this year, mainly trying to short commodity stocks on too much leverage before the bubble had actually burst.

Now oil and mining stocks have come crashing back down without me I'm pretty gutted, but I'm not asking the government – aka the taxpayer – to give me back the money I've lost.

I guess the difference is that I didn't actually gamble any money I couldn't afford to lose. If people have gambled their solvency on houses that's not my problem, and I don't want to spend my taxes bailing them out, they'ev have to get repoessed, someone with capital can pick their house up cheap and they can go back to renting.

Renting is not the end of the world, I've been doing it for years.

Leverage has bothing to do with a buyer and everything to do with some unproperly regulated wheeler dealer lenders.

Faling house prices will remove the legitimate asset growth of housing stocks which will hit all homeowners and investors who invest in the housing market such as pensions. They will lose out too and the level of you future pension will be affected regardless of whether you were a home buyer yourself. You will also pay high taxes because less people will be working.

I agree the government isn't the slightest bit interested but that's because they can't drag themseleves away from Milton Friedman's free economics which has not only suffered abject failure, it has taken our whole economy with it unless we take positive action to stabilise it and then attempt to revive the parts which are still able to work.

Incidentally, without consumers in this country there is no chance of revival because consumerism is the lifeblood of our economy and consumers need jobs and money along with the confidence that what they buy will actually hold a certain amount of value otherwise they won't buy.

In such a senario you'll have a lack of confidence in house buyers: [ Why bother to buy syndrome ], and boarded up shops and other outlets with no workers inside, a smashed buildings trade, no manufacturing base to meet demand which isn't there, and a spiral of government debt and depleting population with closures of schools and hospitals along with rubbish piling the streets as being the worst outcome.

That's the future unless the government 'intervenes'.

Even if we get back £5b of the £10b we pay, we don't get to spend it according to our needs and priorities. The EU grants that money in ways important to it, it also attaches conditions to those grants so that local authorities have less to spend than they would otherwise have, because the conditions draw funding from other areas.

The EU will also spend our money in ways which it thinks will promote the image of the EU rather in ways that would be useful to the UK.

We could tell the EU to stuff their union, they wouldn’t approve of that!

Sadly, Dave and George know* that they are little more than glove puppets, any proposals they might suggest are nothing less than a monumental stinking confidence trick, unless they are prepared to tell the EU to stuff their union.

Which they are too spineless to do.