FTB expectations too high?

chucky

neas wrote: »

the whole argument is flawed...cause instead of growing by 1% every month (during last 9 years or what not).. they are now falling by 1% every month.

some places are not falling as much as that. don't read too much into 1% monthly drops because you don't own a house month on month. you do it year on year. so take the period you're planning to own the house for.

neas wrote: »

I just dont get the logic behind people justifying buying, even now when interest rates are low.. and when they go up you will be screwed even more lol.

Alot of us are renting 1 bed flats, to lower rent and maximise savings, so a 1 bed flat rent vs Interest Only on a 3 bed property is still better for me methinks.

it suits you - fine. there are other people with different circumstances that feel that they want to buy.

you have to understand that other people have different situations than yourself and different things happening in their lives.

IveSeenTheLight

mbga9pgf wrote: »

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/retirement/article.html?in_article_id=440443&in_page_id=6

1/3 actually,

So by definition, more than 2/3rd or "generally" retired people are not forced to move

neas

The entire thread was devoted to FTBers.

Im pretty sure most potential FTBers... are either:

1. Living at home (single room)
1.Lodgin (single room)
1. House Sharing (single room)
2. Renting a 1-bed or maybe at a push a 2 bed flat

Hardly any of my mates of similar age and renting are renting a 3 bedroom house.... of course it never made sense to rent a 3 bed house (well almost never)

But comparing renting a 1 bed flat for 2 years and buying your '3 bed family home' now if you can later.

Obviously the former is the best point.

I believe the original argument was that we should all buy 1 bed flats, I really never got why someone could be so silly to do this, house buying had got highly expensive and costly to move... so why saddle yourself with no expansion capabilities when first purchases should be 2 bed flats or 3 bed houses if they can be afforded

Maybe just my way of thinking but i want to 'move/sell' house as little as often as the EA/solictors like their cut.

IveSeenTheLight

neas wrote: »

I believe the original argument was that we should all buy 1 bed flats, I really never got why someone could be so silly to do this, house buying had got highly expensive and costly to move... so why saddle yourself with no expansion capabilities when first purchases should be 2 bed flats or 3 bed houses if they can be afforded

Maybe just my way of thinking but i want to 'move/sell' house as little as often as the EA/solictors like their cut.

So you have no opposition against BTLers buying 1 or 2 bed properties to provide FTBers with the freedom to rent.

whathavewedone

Mpga9jpfg, lets get this straight.

1. You think that the house prices of 1995, which followed a recession (which you probably can't even remember) are the appropriate level for house prices now?

2. You think on a salary of 50k that you should be able to afford to buy a better than average house with no mortgage?

50k in some parts of the country is a very good salary indeed and would certainly enable you to afford a better than average house.

If you can not afford to buy a better than average house then that is because you live in an area where 50k does not make you a big shot high earner but merely a middle ranking earner.

Get over that fact and get over yourself while you're at it.

mbga9pgf

whathavewedone wrote: »

Mpga9jpfg, lets get this straight.

1. You think that the house prices of 1995, which followed a recession (which you probably can't even remember) are the appropriate level for house prices now?

2. You think on a salary of 50k that you should be able to afford to buy a better than average house with no mortgage?

50k in some parts of the country is a very good salary indeed and would certainly enable you to afford a better than average house.

If you can not afford to buy a better than average house then that is because you live in an area where 50k does not make you a big shot high earner but merely a middle ranking earner.

Get over that fact and get over yourself while you're at it.

I am humbled, I truly am. Now get back in your box. You can get over yourself in your overpriced box in the luxury of knowing that its going to be worth approximately 20% less in 12 months time.

I cannot afford because prices are devoid of reality, as proven on this thread. I dont think 50K should get me a home with no mortgage no, but where have I said prices should return to 1995 levels? I purely commented on the fact that prices were more sane and used 95 as an example of how messed up prices are. I think a 50K salary, 72K joint salary with a 25% deposit should get me a hell of a lot more for my money than it can currently., without risking my future financial stability.Fortunately for me, the UK media, the majority of UK economists and I reckon 100% of first time buyers have come round to the idea too.

And if you think picking 1995 is a example of what happens after a recession, I suggest you pluck your head from your colon.I think inflation adjusted equivalent values of homes circa 1995 will be a good example of future prices, because this recession is going to urinate all over its little 1990s cousin. By which time you will be screaming like a baby as a result of losing so much of your equity. But lets get this right, you own a home right, so you dont care? dont make me laugh.

whathavewedone

Incidentally I do hope that your employers aren't monitoring your internet use too heavily. You seem to spend quite a large proportion of your day posting on here for someone in the top 10% per cent of earners. Of course as you also say, your job is completely secure. It's only the rest of the UK that are going to hell in a handbasket.

mbga9pgf

whathavewedone wrote: »

Incidentally I do hope that your employers aren't monitoring your internet use too heavily. You seem to spend quite a large proportion of your day posting on here for someone in the top 10% per cent of earners. Of course as you also say, your job is completely secure. It's only the rest of the UK that are going to hell in a handbasket.

I am about to head off abroad for another few months next week, so my posting rate will drop (sure you will be glad). When I come back, I look forward to hearing how the market is going...

chucky

mbga9pgf wrote: »

I suggest you pluck your head from your colon.I think inflation adjusted equivalent values of homes circa 1995 will be a good example of future prices, because this recession is going to urinate all over its little 1990s cousin. By which time you will be screaming like a baby as a result of losing so much of your equity. But lets get this right, you own a home right, so you dont care? dont make me laugh.

if he doesn't need to sell he won't have a problem really. he has his home and will probably live in it very happily.

it's not his fault that you missed the boat and/or can't make the decision when to buy a property - why so much anger!?

mbga9pgf

Why so much anger from homeowners then on here when they are told their beloved home isnt worth as much as it was bigged up to be mid 2007?

Its almost as if they have had their cake, eaten it, but dont want anyone else to have a slice, no matter how hard others try for it. That, I am afraid, is unacceptable. And I certainly am not going to be told, at a time when I am working my !!!!! to the bone, during the worst housing crash we have ever seen in this country, that I am wrong.