House Prices Up 25% to £274,700 by 2013...

Generali

beingjdc wrote: »

mstar wrote: »

I aspire to owning a boat, a pet tiger, and a maid. It doesn't make it a basic requirement of life.

Owning a maid?

mewbie_2

Generali wrote: »

beingjdc wrote: »

Owning a maid?

It's so much better than renting one.

ginvzt

Owning a maid?

That is called slavery... Or marriage - depends how you look at it!

beingjdc

Generali wrote: »

Owning a maid?

I'm not pro-slavery, I'm pro-choice. Obviously owning slaves won't be the right thing for everyone, but hey, you can't legislate morality, and those chimneys won't clean themselves.

mstar

on topic please!

beingjdc

mstar wrote: »

on topic please!

Alright, the emancipation of household servants has led to a disastrous rise in the number of new households being formed, and fed the bubble in house prices. However, the collapse in the market for domestic services has led to a rise in the number of subprime loans in default. In the USA, predatory lending is racism.

rjgb

Here's my two-penneth...

mstar wrote: »

We have to remember .. the population is growing at a record rate (not to mention the migrant workers etc)

The average age in our population is high, meaning that in a few years (say perhaps 5-10 years' time) many thousands more than in the past will be DYING (:A), thus leading to the population size declining. (Sorry, just had to use that icon!).

With building firms in the state they are in at the moment, and no one lending money to them, there might not be many houses built in the next 2-5 years. During that period, people will probably still be too strapped for cash to purchase a property due to the effects of the credit crunch. So property prices should not increase.

Once the 2-5 year period has passed, more people will be dying, increasing the number of vacant properties, and thus reducing demand. So prices should not increase then, either.

I can't see prices increasing significantly for at least the next ten years.

moanymoany

The economic news today doesn't inspire hopes of green shoots - all looks much more like the frozen tundra.

mstar

rjgb wrote: »

Here's my two-penneth...



The average age in our population is high, meaning that in a few years (say perhaps 5-10 years' time) many thousands more than in the past will be DYING (:A), thus leading to the population size declining. (Sorry, just had to use that icon!).

With building firms in the state they are in at the moment, and no one lending money to them, there might not be many houses built in the next 2-5 years. During that period, people will probably still be too strapped for cash to purchase a property due to the effects of the credit crunch. So property prices should not increase.

Once the 2-5 year period has passed, more people will be dying, increasing the number of vacant properties, and thus reducing demand. So prices should not increase then, either.

I can't see prices increasing significantly for at least the next ten years.

you keep mentioning dying? i don't see ur logic statistically we are living longer and the biggest house purchasers are NOT people who are close to dying. statistically the number born/migrating to this country outweights how many are dying.

beingjdc

mstar wrote: »

you keep mentioning dying? i don't see ur logic statistically we are living longer and the biggest house purchasers are NOT people who are close to dying. statistically the number born/migrating to this country outweights how many are dying.

The number of people who want to sell quickly, though, is surely currently heavily dominated by people who have inherited houses?

As to migration, I bet we see a few years of net Emigration thanks to the new economic climate.