|
Randarkman posted:Well, at least SP didn't end up led by Ola Borten Moe. Dude was just kind of scary when it came to his enthusiasm for everything oil. Don't really know much about Vedum as regards oil, but he can't really be as bad as Borten Moe. Are Kalvø's evil twin
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 10:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
Cardiac posted:Regarding C? In that case, me too. That's because S are seen as wellmeaning incometents at best and willfully ignorant at worst. Slightly unrelated, but my bf told me that apparently there's a new tax kicking in starting this summer for electronics, courtesy of MP. My switch just got like 300 kr more expensive 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
McCloud posted:Slightly unrelated, but my bf told me that apparently there's a new tax kicking in starting this summer for electronics, courtesy of MP. My switch just got like 300 kr more expensive I don't think this is actually a thing. I remember there was talks of some kind of dangerous chemical tax last summer but if that had made it into the budget I'm pretty sure the media would be throwing a poo poo-storm right about now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:I don't think this is actually a thing. I remember there was talks of some kind of dangerous chemical tax last summer but if that had made it into the budget I'm pretty sure the media would be throwing a poo poo-storm right about now. There was talk about tax on electronic equipment based on weight of the thingie, which I think is included in the budget. Can't recall whether it was cancelled or not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:There was talk about tax on electronic equipment based on weight of the thingie, which I think is included in the budget. Yeah that's the same one I had in mind. But the weight suggestions were so high that I can't imagine it would have any real impact on consumer electronics per unit price like Mcclouds example above. (a Switch is what, 1 kg?)
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
It was not canceled, it just hasnt kicked in yet. https://www.skatteverket.se/foretag...8eb8fd2817.html "Skatten beräknas på varornas vikt exklusive emballage och är 8 kr/kg för vitvaror och 120 kr/kg för övrig elektronik. För att en vara inte ska få en oproportionerligt hög skatt begränsas skatten till maximalt 320 kr per vara."
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 18:00
|
|
|
McCloud posted:It was not canceled, it just hasnt kicked in yet. Ah. A "gently caress the poor" tax. S have historically been good at those.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Yeah that's the same one I had in mind. But the weight suggestions were so high that I can't imagine it would have any real impact on consumer electronics per unit price like Mcclouds example above. (a Switch is what, 1 kg?) Listen pal, I'm a goon, and if it's one thing goons are good at, it's hyperbole about videogames  (it was my bf that said it would be 300kr. He might have gotten it confused with a ps4)
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
McCloud posted:It was not canceled, it just hasnt kicked in yet. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Poil posted:Holy gently caress that's going to raise costs of upgrading computers with an extra few hundred sek on freaking everything. That's unclear, if you go into the actual legal definitions it's very specific about what has to be there for it to fall under the tax. For example: quote:6 § Rätt till avdrag för skatt föreligger om varan inte innehåller Not that I'm that up to snuff on my circuitboard trivia that I know whether this is narrow or broad. Mostly it seems to be targeting cheap plastic crap.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Who's going to keep track of all these components? Sounds like a retailer/importer nightmare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Threadkiller Dog posted:Who's going to keep track of all these components? Sounds like a retailer/importer nightmare. Producer, you have to apply to not pay the tax if I haven't misunderstood the wording.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Poil posted:Holy gently caress that's going to raise costs of upgrading computers with an extra few hundred sek on freaking everything. Not that many hardware components that weigh more than a kilo nowadays. And from personal experience the weighty parts such as chassis and power supply have quite some longevity. It surely will add up with time though, especially if you are one of those that upgrades constantly to sit at the bleeding edge of performance. I think would be an ok tax in theory for steering the market towards less bulky tech. But for that it will be utterly useless if it applies to Sweden only, and I bet it will make some specific items, barely containing electronics, stupidly expensive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
It's a measure to get rid of some of the nastier chemicals used in electronics such as brominated flame retardants. Those are already limited by RoHS, so I doubt this will have much impact.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
Good news everyone! After a short price stop, housing prices are rising again, at a tune of 8% over the last year! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 09:39
|
|
|
White Rock posted:Good news everyone! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 09:55
|
|
|
White Rock posted:Good news everyone!
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 10:30
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:Regarding C? In that case, me too. Well, S being unable to handle profits is sort of their thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 11:57
|
|
|
Truly the best fitting for this thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Really? Cause I think we're all aware the building is burning and we're all running around with our clothes on fire screaming for help, but the exits are blocked, the phone lines are cut and no one is coming to help.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 10:13
|
|
|
Can we make this the thread icon?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
McCloud posted:Really? Cause I think we're all aware the building is burning and we're all running around with our clothes on fire screaming for help, but the exits are blocked, the phone lines are cut and no one is coming to help. Seems perfectly reasonable to me that I need to queue for 14 years or save up 2 full annual pre-tax wages to afford a 1-room shithole. Nothing odd going on here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 10:58
|
|
|
3.5 million for a 1-room. Sucks to be in Stockholm. That is literally the same price we paid (well, borrowed) for a decent sized house within 40 min commuting distance of central Copenhagen. The whole thing is like a pyramid scheme, in that if you didn't get in at the start, you are going to be so hosed when the crash hits.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 11:08
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Seems perfectly reasonable to me that I need to queue for 14 years or save up 2 full annual pre-tax wages to afford a 1-room shithole. Nothing odd going on here. Personally I'm hoping the bubble pops and market prises crash so I can snag something real cheap. Assuming of course that such a crash doesn't affect the savings in my bank account. Assuming the stock markets crash (like 2008 crash) and the housing market collapses, how will that affect money in a proverbial matress? Maybe it's time to invest in silver... Anyways, I've often wondered how easy it would be to fix the housing problems in Stockholm and Gothenburg. I mean they must be building like crazy but demand still far outstrips supply. Also the crash isn't going to happen anytime soon, because people will always need places to live. The obscene prices might plateu but I don't think the demand will go away anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 11:47
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:3.5 million for a 1-room. Sucks to be in Stockholm. I live in a 22 kvm flat along the blue subway line (Solna) as a 25 year old man, paying just a smidge over 4k a month. If you would've told me at age 10 that this would be way better than you could hope, I'd tell you to take a hike
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 12:57
|
|
so that means I can be a cheapskate and post about posting instead of having some wit or spending any more on comedy avs for people. Which I'm also incapable of. Comedy.
|
Retarded Goatee posted:I live in a 22 kvm flat along the blue subway line (Solna) as a 25 year old man, paying just a smidge over 4k a month. It's kinda sad that lovely fifteen years ago is landed gentry levels today.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 13:21
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:It's kinda sad that lovely fifteen years ago is landed gentry levels today. At least the prices are incentivizing new builds, but the prices on those are still ridiculous (like 20/25% more than the same exact place in a 3+YO building, how does that make sense ever).
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 13:30
|
|
|
It's actually even worse than that. The centralization of government agencies, corporate offices following the agencies, increased demand for service sector jobs from the aforementioned factors and universities that keep increasing total seat-numbers to meet demand means that more people have to be in our growing cities than ever before. (because that's where the jobs are) So you have a stagnant supply (because the market sucks), an increasing demand, loving tax subsidies for taking on huge loans and then Ingves drops the central rate to near nothing to follow international trends. A perfect recipe for a financial disaster.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 13:53
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:3.5 million for a 1-room. Sucks to be in Stockholm. evil_bunnY posted:You can offer all the tax incentives you want (but really you loving shouldn't), unless more poo poo gets built everyone's going to be bidding on the same loving real estate. I hate it when people go on about how if we just change regulation or taxation in this or that way then we will solve the housing crisis. Changing a few numbers here and there won't magically make more apartments appear, and the root of the problem is that we have X amount of houses/apartments within reasonable commuting distance from the city, and Y amount of people who work (or are looking to work) in the city and need to live within a reasonable commuting distance. The only way to to fix the problem is to either make Stockholm unattractive to employers (not a very good solution) or build more housing until X is larger than Y.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
Or even better public transport to make the suburbs a more attractive option than they are right now (if you don't have a family). When I was shopping for my apartment, that was my biggest issue with moving away from the center.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:So you have a stagnant supply (because the market sucks) Rexides posted:Or even better public transport to make the suburbs a more attractive option than they are right now (if you don't have a family). When I was shopping for my apartment, that was my biggest issue with moving away from the center.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 14:13
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:The only way to to fix the problem is to either make Stockholm unattractive to employers (not a very good solution) or build more housing until X is larger than Y. My favorite.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 14:18
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:Regarding C? In that case, me too. Makes sense to me. SD if you hate foreigners and/or the left. C if you're an equitable and principled sort of fellow who hates poor people equally, regardless of what they think and/or are from/look like.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:The only way to to fix the problem is to either make Stockholm unattractive to employers (not a very good solution) or build more housing until X is larger than Y. What about killing the rich?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
Cake Smashing Boob posted:What about killing the rich? Don't bikeshed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:That's not on the market. Low rates and rising prices make it extremely attractive to fund new builds, it's 100% on the local government to make sure it happens. Uppsala only ever got so bad because they failed to recognize the need to increase supply. That's because we removed housing from the list of the state's and municipalities responsibilities. The people who zone are no longer the same people who are responsible for building our base supply. Danderyd for example is never going to zone for high-density housing because that would bring in the undesirables which their electorate does not want. There's no legislation or mandate from on-high for them to change so they won't. Plus, when municipalities do allow building (Sundbyberg and Solna for example) it's predominately mid-sized condo's which is not at all what Stockholm needs at the moment. (Not that the market cares, because condo's are very profitable and promise a fast return) Stockholm Stad meanwhile allows new office complexes, restaurants and stores to open left and right while leaving it to the other municipalities to figure out where the people working in these places are going to live. No one is taking any responsibility and everyone is just waiting for someone else to take charge. Market-driven housing is a disaster and that is not unique to Stockholm. There is no long-term plan anymore for where people are going to live and it's us that get to pay for it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 14:36
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:It's actually even worse than that. The centralization of government agencies, corporate offices following the agencies, increased demand for service sector jobs from the aforementioned factors and universities that keep increasing total seat-numbers to meet demand means that more people have to be in our growing cities than ever before. (because that's where the jobs are) So you have a stagnant supply (because the market sucks), an increasing demand, loving tax subsidies for taking on huge loans and then Ingves drops the central rate to near nothing to follow international trends. A perfect recipe for a financial disaster. You also have the rather dramatic increase of inhabitants due to immigration, who have made even cheap undesirable apartments hard to get. For them, the situation is even worse since the lack of cheap housing makes the integration process even harder. Also, what will it take for the whole situation to blow up? The shortage of housing is going to remain for a long time, so there will be an accompanying high demand. I guess increasing rents might cause a crash, since a lot of people in Stockholm can't afford rents in the range of 5% or so and keep their housing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Market-driven housing is a disaster and that is not unique to Stockholm. There is no long-term plan anymore for where people are going to live and it's us that get to pay for it. Ding ding ding! It's exactly this, however it's not even that simple. There's also the question of the people on top of this pyramid scheme, who have money and who vote. Almost all politicians with national or regional power of some sort are heavily invested in the real estate market, and if this Collateral Damage posted:The only way to to fix the problem is to either make [city] unattractive to employers (not a very good solution) or build more housing until X is larger than Y. were to happen housing prices would either stagnate or plummet. This causes coronary unrest for all these fuckers, because housing is a pretty big industry, and a lot of people have been making a very pretty penny on this at the expense of immigrants, poors and young people. Seriously, housing is HUGE and the knock-on effects of population placement etc. is also very very significant to both the private and national economy. Nobody wants to be the guy to burst the bubble, so everyone is playing a communal game of the tragedy of the commons. They don't have a long term plan because they don't want a long term plan. If you propose or implement one, you're the guy they go to when it inevitably goes sour.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 14:59
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:were to happen housing prices would either stagnate or plummet. This causes coronary unrest for all these fuckers, because housing is a pretty big industry, and a lot of people have been making a very pretty penny on this at the expense of immigrants, poors and young people. Seriously, housing is HUGE and the knock-on effects of population placement etc. is also very very significant to both the private and national economy. Nobody wants to be the guy to burst the bubble, so everyone is playing a communal game of the tragedy of the commons. That's why we only get the useless proposals for changes in regulation, where none of them will actually affect people who already own their properties and only serve to drive prices up higher.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
Yeah in Uppsala it started getting fixed when UU started basically bullying the municipality. Turns out it's hard to attract good staff IF THEY HAVE NOWHERE TO LIVE. Also, I didn't mean let the market decide what and where to build. I meant that were the muni to get its head clear out of their asses for a change, the market would still happily build what the muni wants, sorry for being unclear. WRT sizing, building larger appartments also helps because it allows a trickle down effect, but that only works if people can afford it in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2017 15:49
|
|