Mainstream media article says it's not lending, its prices.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So the other partner who currently doesn't work, goes to work.

Earns some wages, and hands them all over for childcare.

Were no further forward. It's not just 2-3 years. 4 year olds can't walk themselves home from school and let themselves in, while cooking a slap up meal for when mum and dad get home.

That's quite a shortsighted view.

I was in exactly this position a few years ago. A good percentage of my wife's wage went in childcare and we wondered if it was worth it.

However, our monthly income was higher than it otherwise would have been. We were able to more easily pay the mortgage, had foreign holidays and the kids enjoyed nurseries and latterly breakfast clubs and after school clubs. If you just say it's not worth it based on when they are very small means you put yourself at risk of missing out on promotions and pay-rises which, obviously, you don't get if you don't work. Once you are not shelling out for two full time nursery places you suddenly feel rich!

There's negatives as well. Not least you get to spend less time with your kids which is time that's gone forever and the rushing about trying to get them sorted in the mornings and picked up on time in the afternoon.

Overall it was worth working out a cash-flow looking a few years ahead rather than just the early months when they first went to full time nursery.

I agree house prices are high but someone with two kids and stay at home partner with an income of £26 just can't afford a house - they need to earn more. Even house prices at 50% of today's value are going to be a stretch to be affordable.