House prices are close to affordable levels, reveals survey... BUY!! BUY!!! BUY!!!

Realy

BettiePage wrote: »

Why not? Twenty, thirty etc.. years ago only the husbands income was taken into consideration.

If only men worked that might still be the case but the world evolves, women work and want jobs and fair pay, and I agree with them.
Do you think all women should give up work or do poor paid jobs so men get paid more?
I think the past as gone if you like it or not.

mitchaa

BettiePage wrote: »

Why not? Twenty, thirty etc.. years ago only the husbands income was taken into consideration.

On that basis...

If 1 x average income (£25k) can afford to buy an average home (3bed SD)..

2 x average Joes are able to afford a 5/6bed country retreat.

2x middle earners are able to afford a mansion

2 x higher earners are able to afford a castle.

Doesn't work like that, 1 x average income should not be enough to warrant an average home, it should be enough to afford a 1/2bed flat.

£150k is affordable seeing as the average household income is ITRO £38k

Are you then trying to say each of these households should be able to afford 2 homes? 1 average home based on the £25k and a flat perhaps for their children based on the remainder £13k?

We would soon run out of housing if that were to happen

PasturesNew

It seems few people realised I was taking the pee when I started the thread

PasturesNew

With couples bagging 4-6x joint income, yet sharing outgoing costs, singles never stood a chance.

Having said that, there seem to be a lot of people who jumped on the bandwagon before they were ready and promptly fell out, or the missus got up the duff.

It was an era when the whole house ownership thing was taken lightly, like a disposable piece of cheap clothing. There seemed to be no fear. Mortgages used to be something you had to really beg for and they were known as a millstone round your neck.

WTF?_2

Reading this thread, you couldn't find a better example of how our resident 'bulls' like to simply insult and label other posters instead of actually coming up with valid points.

Realy

!!!!!!? wrote: »

Reading this thread, you couldn't find a better example of how our resident 'bulls' like to simply insult and label other posters instead of actually coming up with valid points.

Where are the insults? You are funny you can go off at someone for posting somthing posertive but if a few people make valid claims they are "resident 'bulls' like to simply insult and label other posters "

Listen..........................................
It's the worlds smallest violin.:rolleyes:
Your idea of debating some times is listening to bears hugging.
People have just debated and not a sign of an insult.

Cat695

Interesting to hear what people think the average income is (even with links)

some saying "income" as one person in the family some saying "income" as two people's salary (family)
According to the BBC at the end of last year (2207)the average "family" income was £32,779 and that was before tax (can't really give a average income for 2008 as its not over yet)http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7071611.stm (oh and they got their statistics from the ONS not made up by some BBC bod)

32779 x 3.5 = 115k (give or take a couple of hundred quid) even with a 10% deposit thats still only 126.5k

So House prices still have some way to come down (in some not all areas) for a family to be able to afford a family home.

Thank god I earn more than the average family (and i still can't afford to buy a house in the SW yet comfortably!!)

Max_Headroom_3

I think the other danger with quoting average income is that there's an assumption that goes with it that average income must therefore be what most people are on (because "average" suggests "typical").

However if I might explain it this way (using extreme cases to make the point easy to understand).

Take 10 people, nine are earning £5,000/year, one is earning £1,000,000/year.

Now it's clear to see that the typical wage is £5,000/year, however the average wage is £104,500/year.

So we need to be careful that we don't confuse average with typical. If a typical wage is (say) £15,000 then it's not really possible for anyone to be on massively less than that, but it is very possible for some to be on massively more, skewing the average way above the typical.

Hope that makes sense!

Realy

Max_Headroom wrote: »

I think the other danger with quoting average income is that there's an assumption that goes with it that average income must therefore be what most people are on (because "average" suggests "typical").

However if I might explain it this way (using extreme cases to make the point easy to understand).

Take 10 people, nine are earning £5,000/year, one is earning £1,000,000/year.

Now it's clear to see that the typical wage is £5,000/year, however the average wage is £104,500/year.

So we need to be careful that we don't confuse average with typical. If a typical wage is (say) £15,000 then it's not really possible for anyone to be on massively less than that, but it is very possible for some to be on massively more, skewing the average way above the typical.

Hope that makes sense!

I think the average wage is done on median not mean.

PasturesNew

I am now on 40% of what I was just 3 months ago. Everything's going southwards....
- interest rate's dropped, so income is less
- online earnings bombed the last 3 months
- other work I did from home that was 20% of my income stopped last week

Bit dire. Ignoring my STR fund (I pretend it doesn't exist), I am now on less than minimum wage. Ooops. Need a job.

Anybody got a job for me please, thankyou?