This is bizarre. An interest rate cut is expected soon and houses are not selling...

pickles110564

carolt wrote: »

Or are you sugesting that only the very well paid should consider having children? :rolleyes:

Scarily, possibly you are..... :eek:

And that is how it should be, least they would get all the Hi Tech goodies that they all deserve.

Gangstabird

HankMcSpank wrote: »

[clears throat] ahem, you said this in your original post...



Now imagine, I wanted to get repossessed too & sought advice on an internet discussion forum from someone who'd been there- imagine I was wavering....well, a statement like...

"This is a good time to buy"....would probably have me signing up straight away for an overpriced ex public toilet in Hackney.

You have picked out a small part of that quote and you know it. This was followed up by the afterthought, if you know what I mean, generally assuming that it's not but as interest rates are low, it should by so why isn't it. You are a bit norty just picking out the bits when my post is quite frankly a musing of a situation!!! Anyway I wasn't giving advice anyway to anyone stupid enough to buy a house at the moment!

I was 18 and very stupid with my finances when my property was repoed. This was 20 years ago and I would hope that I have grown up a little by now. Did you never do anything stupid in your youth then or were you perfect all of the time?

Jonbvn

carolt wrote: »

Or are you sugesting that only the very well paid should consider having children? :rolleyes:

Scarily, possibly you are.....

Or are you suggesting that people should have as many kids as possible, regardless of their economic status, and expect the taxpayer to support them?

IveSeenTheLight

carolt wrote: »

You haven't answered my points at all - if everyone put there spare cash into BTL, there would be no-one left to rent - your approach only works if there are enough people priced-out to pay your mortgage costs. (so hardly a surprise you don't welcome falling prices!)

And the amount a couple could save before having children from the 'spare' salary would be highly unlikely to pay for one child let alone more for any length of time - except for those on very high salaries.

Or are you sugesting that only the very well paid should consider having children? :rolleyes:

Scarily, possibly you are..... :eek:

carolt, are you forgetting all the discussions we've had?
You're post seems to suggest that

You are the one suggesting only very high paid people should consider having children.
I know many people, including myself, who are only averagedly paid for the industry / area they are from that have afforded to buy and have children.

Whether you can afford to buy and have children in your area, I do not know.

I do know that being a home owner is not a right and unfortunately carolt, if you can't afford it then you make your decisions based around that.

On the subject of house prices, I have many times before agreed that the average uk price is above what it should be. I've also said that some areas are vastly overpriced, while others are not.

I don't subscribe to the theory that house prices must fall enough in order that all can afford to buy, that simply is not how it works

Incidently, the UK average house price only needs a less than 8% drop to be at the long term trend of house prices. No doubt it will overshoot and give you the possibility of getting a home.
I do hope so, maybe then your frustration levels will ease a bit.

Finally your suggestion that I have priced people out of buying my BTL's. Both are rented out to professional who have no interest of buying. Their profession means that they may move on every few years.
Where do you propose poeple who do not want to buy stay if there are no private rental properties? Regardless of your answer, it is my tenants choice. They could go to your suggestion already but they chose my properties.
It's a free democracy

IveSeenTheLight

carolt wrote: »

Or are you sugesting that only the very well paid should consider having children? :rolleyes:

Scarily, possibly you are..... :eek:

Just to put plainly, I said in my post that for the last 8 years, my wife and I have lived on one salary.

The second salary was put away to reduce mortgage debt.

Thus now that we are to have children, we can live on one salary, because we have lived within that means for the last 8 years in preperation of having children.

It sounds like you want your cake, eat it, someone elses cake and more importantly, you expect it now!!!!!
No planning of buying the ingredients, preparing the mixture and allowing for the sponge to bake

neas

IveSeenTheLight most of my friends who rent, would love to buy.. but cant 'afford' 3x the value someone, either a FTB or a BTLer paid for it 8 years ago.

This is obvious, and a reason why prices are tanking down faster than any other phase in recent history (80 years!).

Alot of them would love their own place because sharing with 5 others... while may have some fun points they are frustrated from 'sharing' for years. Many of them are approaching 30!.. before they would get a deposit to afford a house.

My parents bought a place when they were 20.. it was hard similarly for them.... my mum didnt earn much but my dad had a reasonable family job.... they paid the mortgage off 10 years early.

It seems to me that you are saying that its fine and natural that the average age of a FTBer is shooting up. Correct?

I'm lucky Wife and have a reasonable income compared to our areas average.... we are savvy savers and at 25 and 28 we could afford to buy a house now (25% deposit etc)... but this is only because we've worked our assess off in overtime, saving and scrimping more than my parents did.

I certainly would've bought a house 2 years ago if I had enough deposit but I didn't.. (about 6k for a 115-125k house). It felt like a losing battle because as my deposit increased so would the value of the FTBer house.... So to see them reverse that trend delivers sheer delight inside. That I won't be forced to be suckered into paying more into the pot than others who bought 10 years ago did.


The HPI was simply a way that wealth was transfered from youth to elder people... not just BTL but through MEWing and general rises in the 'price' of ones home.

If you bought a house 10 years ago say... worth 50k... and then on average its worth 150k now.

Where do you think that extra money came from? a small percentage was inflation (10-20%) the rest was a massive redistribution of wealth from FTBers to people who got on the wagon early and already owned a home... it kept going like a pyramid scheme until it buckled under its own weight.

The opposite will happen regardless of 'supply/demand' excuses.. recession will put alot out of work, reducing income, things will get more expensive and prices of houses will drop significantly so they are close if not bang on the trend of what they 'should be' according to inflation. They may even drop further than that.

This perceived wealth will mean the youth will be able to afford the dingy 2 bedrooms finally.... and not be financially crippled. Its very simple really.

HPI = Older draining wealth from Younger
HPC = Part of drained wealth being redistributed to new young.

Ofcourse there are some 'olders' who have 'won' permanently and some 'younger' who have forever been lumbered with an overpriced mortgage... but the balance will have been restored.

SingleSue

There is also the thing that at the time, you could afford to have children but then something went very badly wrong.......

I remember the vicar saying to me and my now ex husband in our pre wedding lecture - Never put of having children until you can afford it because you will never be able to afford it as people tend to live to their means.

We didn't put it off or try for it, we had seemingly had that choice removed from us due to a fertility problem....then had a surprise!

IveSeenTheLight

neas wrote: »

IveSeenTheLight most of my friends who rent, would love to buy.. but cant 'afford' 3x the value someone, either a FTB or a BTLer paid for it 8 years ago. 8 years ago, the house prices were still below the long term trend, so I accept it was easier then than it is now where the average house is above the long term trend

This is obvious, and a reason why prices are tanking down faster than any other phase in recent history (80 years!). True, and we are fast approaching the long term trend because of this

Alot of them would love their own place because sharing with 5 others... while may have some fun points they are frustrated from 'sharing' for years. Many of them are approaching 30!.. before they would get a deposit to afford a house. Historically (and its returning now) you always needed to have good credit rating and a sizeable deposit. My wife has just turned 30, yet she, along with me have been able to buy. Out of interest, sharing with 5 others should be able to mean they can save a lot or else they are spending it elsewhere or cannot afford to buy

My parents bought a place when they were 20.. it was hard similarly for them.... my mum didnt earn much but my dad had a reasonable family job.... they paid the mortgage off 10 years early.

It seems to me that you are saying that its fine and natural that the average age of a FTBer is shooting up. Correct? No, I have not said that, I maintain that if you have a good credit rating and a decent deposit you can buy at any suitable age. A few years ago I repeatedly recommended a friend to move out from home and buy a place. He has on quite a few occasions thanked me for one of the best decisions he has made. Now this was his specific circumstance and I dont say that this is suitable for everyone.

I'm lucky Wife and have a reasonable income compared to our areas average.... we are savvy savers and at 25 and 28 we could afford to buy a house now (25% deposit etc)... but this is only because we've worked our assess off in overtime, saving and scrimping more than my parents did. Well done, good for you. Sounds similar to what my wife and I did when we saved hard bought when we were 21 & 26

I certainly would've bought a house 2 years ago if I had enough deposit but I didn't.. (about 6k for a 115-125k house). It felt like a losing battle because as my deposit increased so would the value of the FTBer house.... So to see them reverse that trend delivers sheer delight inside. That I won't be forced to be suckered into paying more into the pot than others who bought 10 years ago did. I dont know your area. In the area I have vested interests, house prices have not reverted to 10 years ago, so I guess you have made a wise decision


The HPI was simply a way that wealth was transfered from youth to elder people... not just BTL but through MEWing and general rises in the 'price' of ones home.

If you bought a house 10 years ago say... worth 50k... and then on average its worth 150k now. In my area, the 10 year change is 120% so £50k would be £110k, not £150k

Where do you think that extra money came from? a small percentage was inflation (10-20%) the rest was a massive redistribution of wealth from FTBers to people who got on the wagon early and already owned a home... it kept going like a pyramid scheme until it buckled under its own weight. A bit extreme I must say. I initiallt as a FTB bought just below the long term trend, not at the trough. I note we are almost back down to the UK average long term trend

The opposite will happen regardless of 'supply/demand' excuses.. recession will put alot out of work sadly, reducing income for those that lose their jobs, but remember, even at a high of 3million unemployed (up 1.5million) its still a small percentage of the workplace, things will get more expensive and prices of houses will drop significantly so they are close if not bang on the trend of what they 'should be' according to inflation. They may even drop further than that. Are you suggesting that prices need to drop so that those that become unemployed can afford to buy . Ok, I'm being pedantic and I do accept that there will be an overshoot to the long term trend. But as you say, they will drop to the trend which is less than 8% away

This perceived wealth will mean the youth will be able to afford the dingy 2 bedrooms finally.... and not be financially crippled. Its very simple really.In some areas 2 bed are already affordable, maybe not in your area, but you have to look at each area specifically.

HPI = Older draining wealth from Younger
HPC = Part of drained wealth being redistributed to new young. Is this so the young can afford to buy, go out, have nice cars / holidays etc. Again being pedantic, but why should the youth be able to have everything at once?

Ofcourse there are some 'olders' who have 'won' permanently and some 'younger' who have forever been lumbered with an overpriced mortgage... but the balance will have been restored. And as stated above. We are very near the UK average long term trend

neas, probably easier to annotate your post above

HankMcSpank

I started self harming about 2 paragraphs into that post above.

DirectDebacle

HankMcSpank wrote: »

I started self harming about 2 paragraphs into that post above.

I thought it was all in red then realised it had made my eyes bleed.:D