Q. Question?
The Intellectual Patent Law is biased in favour of composers, writers and publishers. A writer invests very little in the production of written material. In some cases a writer is paid in advance by a publisher on the basis of the synopsis. The investments a writer puts in producing a book or, a poem are minimal. The same applies to musicians.Their property rights are protected for 60 and 70 years after their deaths. On the other hand inventors have only 25 years priority to their intellectual property from the date of publication. Inventors create jobs that make it possible for people to afford the luxury of books and music. Without inventions our industries would be severely handicapped. So why is this disparity in existence when inventors have to invest a fortune to get their inventions into production..Most of the intellectual property time is spent in design and development of the product and the risk of infringement is far higher than that of music or a publication. Should the law not be far more in favour of inventors and not the other way round? How does a dead person benefit from intellectual property?
A. Best Answer: Not true at all. Trademarks are potentially eternal, as long as they are maintained. They can be used for any aspect of an invention, from shape to smell to taste.
Patents do have a very limited time-frame, but there is no obligation to patent your invention. The formula to Coca-Cola has never been patented, for example.
Q. Question?
I was asked this tonight, so I haven't had much time to think and I am very confused as to what to do as it is a very tempting offer.
Basically (and I don't know how he even has the right to do this) but my father has offered me a 50% share of my Aunties house. I assume she has no paid her mortgage off. My father said that he considers this to be an investment and as I am the only sibling left with no money, my father feels that this venture would be in my best interests. I assume he has spoken about this with my Aunty but i'm not sure.
I have said no however but this decision can be reversed as it was only a couple of hours ago. My Aunty lives alone and is nearing 60 (not that I am contemplating her snuffing anytime soon) but she has been in this property since before her divorce. It's no a particularly amazing area but my father feels that this would be an investment and I assume he feels it would generate money (for me obviously - or I hope so!). My Aunty is very established there and is very settled, so there would be no threat of her moving anytime soon.
To give you a heads up, I am quite young and this venture would mean that I would be required to move 50 miles away and live with my Aunty in her (my!) home.
Is this worth it? or is it a recipe for disaster?
Please help!!!!
A. Best Answer: Was this an offer to buy half a share in your auntie's house? You have no money. Could you find this, or would you pay her something every week as an ongoing purchase increment? This would serve two purposes - it would boost her pension and gradually buy you your half share. But if this were an offer to give you a 50% share as a gift, what strings are attached? You have said you would be required to live there, 50 miles away. How does that fit in with getting to work? How well do you get on with your auntie?
Talk to your Dad a bit more about it. Tell him you need more information before you can make a decision. Nearing 60 is a long way from being a geriatric, but that day will come. By then you may be 20 years older. In the meantime you may have married. Would you be free to bring a wife to live in this house, which would be your home then?
I'd suggest you go and stay with your auntie for a trial period of at least six months before making a definite commitment. Commute to work if you have to. See how it works out. Come to some arrangement about sharing expenses during your stay - you are not a visitor, you are a potential equal partner. You won't want to be a burden on her.
You may find you have been offered a very definite foot on to the property ladder.
Q. Question?
I'm in the lucky position to be able to upgrade from a 3 bed semi worth £300G to a 4 Bed Detached at £400G but i have a dilemma.My 3 bed semi is very large and we don't mind living there, although it would be nice to upgrade, i'm toying with the idea of taking out a mortgage on a 1/2 bed flat at £135G instead and renting it out as an investment as i could get around £600pm rent as well.
So my question to you is this, what would you do? What is likely to prove the better investment? PS They will both be via a mortgage although i do have £200G equity to put down on a larger 4 bed! Thanks in advance for advice!! It's a UK property,
All properties are in Essex Southern England thanx
A. Best Answer: If you buy a bigger house you should not look on this as an investment as it may not increase in value due to the issues in the property market.
Whereas renting out a property is often seen as an Investment (although capital growth is always uncertain), you would need to put down probably a minimum of around £40k deposit leaving a mortgage of £95k with a monthly interest-only payments of approximately £300 to £350/month. As you can get £600/month in rent this looks like possibly a good investment proposition. Please bear in mind the periods of time when your rented property is unoccupied because you will still have to pay the mortgage even though no rent is being received.
I personally would probably go for a rental property but my wife would go for the bigger home!
The answers above are for guidance only and should not be acted upon without you receiving professional mortgage advice relevant to your circumstances. To find an independent mortgage adviser please go to http://www.unbiased.co.uk
Q. Question?
I have lived all over England, and definitely believe London is the best,
best pubs and restaurants
friendliest people
best night life and sights to see
best for property investment
A. Best Answer: Kensington's nice but awfully expensive. London in general is not a friendly place. Indeed I doubt many people would disagree if I said it was the least friendly place in Britain.
Glasgow and Manchester also have amazing pubs, restaurant and nightlife and are probably much better for property investment because they are not already as ludicrously overpriced as London.
Q. Question?
.. how sad and draconian a world is it that the Brits inhabit and do nothing about... capitalism has never been about sharing... it spun that as a cheap, mugs' myth by Blair and Thatcher. Capitalism is solely in the hands of the old wealth base. They simply print more money.
That has always led to the problem and funded the rich out of it.
But it is a recent example of the ordinary bloke re-mortgaging his brains out, holidaying in the Bahamas and only being able to pay for it on paper. It is not just the filthy rich that are the butt of the recent financial meltdown. In reality we all are... because we believe the existing system is the only option... often negate individual talents, and rely on peer group mediocrity that encourages people to move from blue to white collar lifestyles, which they end up hating, because the larger capitalist agenda eats that socio mobilising fodder alive.
UK is still an old class culture that now administers power from the inaccessible corridors of the City, with a Gentlemens' Club marginalising mindset that trickles down faster than their much exulted loose change. It has exploited all and sunder for years, centuries. In the past it sent young blokes to their deaths... now it kills off generations financially (and still exports war). The few who have done well will seek to discredit those who have not - no doubt here also.
Look at the fundamentals of UK economy and you see a City based, scam laden, Gin and Port spin society, hell bent on escaping its class and wealth confining reality. Obsessed by money.
It has lost much of its cultural identity, faith and family values. The fundamentals of social well being. Life is about sharing certainly. But you do not need that much to be able to look after family.
The housing market is still down... the banks are brimming with cash... property is now about to be sold as a safe investment. The whole thing will start all over again. Because they control YOU the lambs who live for the good life... even though you probably already have it. Now they need to entice a new era of mugs to fund their next bubble.
It generally takes time and dedication to get somewhere stable and satisfying.
You do live in Govt housing! By the time you pay a mortgage the house has cost you 3 times its value! A one bed flat in S London is still worth 120K... 20 years ago it was worth 70K... duh do the maths.
ketkonen
It's just a game bud. The shedding game. They have to print money - that is the only way Capitalism works.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8bKmNCJuH0&feature=related
ketkonen
It's just a game bud. The shedding game. They have to print money - that is the only way Capitalism works.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8bKmNCJuH0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8bKmNCJuH0&feature=related
A. Best Answer: F...in hell ........ I'll have some of what youre smoking please!!
Q. Question?
A. Best Answer: If the company makes a contribution to the scheme, go for it. Keep your existing investment. Diversity in investment is always a good idea - you never know which market will be depressed when you need the proceeds.
Q. Question?
hello everyone, in a few weeks it's my mum's 50th birthday and we want to get her some jewellery and we have saved alot of money over the past few months to do so. (that includes working for my dad) he owns a property investment company, he has brought her a rose gold jaeger-lecoultre watch from paris. so me and my sister decided that we wanted not too look so cheap in comparison with that watch, we decided on a couple of choices that have the links below; please let me know which one you prefer and also if they are good Value for money- i know f all about rings.
http://www.hancocks-london.com/acatalog/info_RNG116014AM.html
http://www.hancocks-london.com/acatalog/info_RNG113438AM.html
or a bracelt;
http://www.hancocks-london.com/acatalog/info_BLT116411AM.html
A. Best Answer: I like the bracelet the best, it is absolutely stunning!
Out of the rings, the first is the nicest.
Lucky Mum!!
You. Have. Class...
Q. Question?
I've been hearing loads of people talking about investing in property for their long term future. There's no way I'll be able to get on the property ladder in this current climate and have been reading Rich Dad, Poor Dad 2 which suggests investing cash in something for the future. Thing is, I have no clue about investing money and would like a few sensible suggestions as to what direction I can take...
A. Best Answer: Take a look at this:
How to choose Investment Opportunities
http://www.ehow.com/how_5511704_choose-investment-opportunities.html
Q. Question?
We have a joint mortgage that I originally put money into to buy out her ex partner and the mortgage is in joint names. Due to a new business she has paid alot of the mortgage but I have been paying into her account to cover other bills and car payments. Id say she has contributed 70% more than I over the last 6 years. There is around 60-70k equity in the property if it was sold. When my grandpa died we were left some money and our son who is 4 was left £5k and my step son from my wifes previous relationship was given £1000. My Grandma then died and left us £5 and £1k for our son and £500 for my step son. Some of the money was spent on a holiday and the rest of it was invested in investment bonds. It hasn't made any money but that's by the by. We needed a new roof that my father paid for and I am paying him back for this. If we do split up i want it to be as amicable as possible but need to know if splitting everything 50/50 is the best option or if it got messy how messy could it get, what could my wife demand and what could I demand. Just really covering my back on this one, I know legal advice is a good idea but were not at that stage yet, but we could be. Any help would be great
A. Best Answer: the law usually says, whats yours is your. so if your son was given money its his. the hous will proberbly be split 50.50 however judges tend to favour whoever is keeping the child. expenses are seen as equal usually so it doesnt really matter whos paid what. as long as both names are on the motrgage there shouldnt be any problems, however it does depend on how the equity is split in the house.
again the bonds, its whosevers name on it but if its your money again it may be contested.
the house is a 50/50 split. i would make sure what your name is on and what hers is on. what names a re on any debt and reasign anything thats hers. she can have for example the sofa if she paid it from her own money however if its been paid for from a joint account, you both own half. ...
anything from a joint account its equal.
hope that helps