On Tue, 09 Oct 2012 11:51:37 +0100
Dave Plowman wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
A bit like the liberal dufflecoats moronic mansion tax then. So if you
bought your house in the 60s or whenever for 20K in some then grungy
area like notting hill or clerkenwell and now its worth a million , too
bad , cough up please. Oh , you can't afford to? Sell your house then
you rich *******. Etc.

The figure quoted for the 'mansion tax' was two, not one million. Although

Oh thats ok then. Those evil spongers with their 2 million quid houses, why
should they keep their investment and not be made homeless when some
unemployed dosser could have the money instead?

I do realise both figures are beyond your ken.

Och , thats right jim lad. I wud ney nowt aboot em.

But since you feel every one should always be able to live in the house
they've bought regardless of income, would you extend that to help with

Are you really such an utterly envious little ****e that you genuinely think
people should lose their home to just finance more government waste or is
it just yet more sad right-on posturing that you're so good at? Perhaps when
you grow up and actually buy your own home instead of living in the squat you
currently inhabit in the peoples republic of balham you might have a different
view.

council charges, maintenance, heating etc?

No. If someone can't afford to live in their house thats their problem, not
the governments. But thats rather different to the government coming along and
saying "That house is worth something, we want some of it, now cough up".

B2003