House prices down to at least 115K... Thans FSA! 3X here we come!

mitchaa

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Why doesnt it?

Its the Median you are looking at I take it, I.e what the average person is actually earning?

It's actually £17520 here then.

You have tabs along the bottom where you can delve deeper into the figures.

It's no use looking at the overall average as it takes into account all those PT workers into the figures.

If you work FT you should be looking at male FT, or female FT, either mean or median whatever you think is fairer, and if working PT look at the PT figures. Gives you a better picture i would say.

Without looking at the figures i do believe the average male median is around £27.5k for FT work and around £33k in the mean average state for the country as a whole.

michaels

It worries me so much that people think this is a good idea.

The Govt dictating what we can spend out money on...

What next - dictating what we can buy?

Dictating what we pay for things in the shops (no point choosing between Tesco or Asda if the prices are fixed)?

Dictating what we can earn?

Preventing us from drinking or smoking (I do neither which is lucky as we won't have the choice to soon)?

Dictating what we can eat (I am partial to the odd biscuit so this one will hit me)?

No doubt mandating exercise, fixing our bed times and taking our children away from us in case we suggest to them that they should be allowed their own independent thoughts and choices...and of course cameras and identity cards to make sure we comply

I suggest the sheep stay and the rest of us vote with our feet. The pound may not go far and no doubt exchange controls will be imposed but surely a life free to make one's own choices as many died for only 70 years ago is worth starting again from scratch for?

b0rker

michaels wrote: »

It worries me so much that people think this is a good idea.

I consider financial regulation to be a great idea. In fact with prudent financial regulation we would most likely not have ended up in this situation in the first place. What I do not think is a good idea is going from allowing 125% mortgages and 6x income multiples one year to dropping the maximum income multiple to 3x and enforcing 60% LTVs the very next year.

If there is one way to ensure mass reposession and the financial turmoil that goes hand in hand with that, welll this would be it.

A more considered and gradual deflation of the bubble is what the doctor ordered.

Thankfully I think that is what Gordon Brown has in mind despite what the ToryGraph may be reporting.

lostinrates

michaels wrote: »

It worries me so much that people think this is a good idea.

The Govt dictating what we can spend out money on...

What next - dictating what we can buy?

Dictating what we pay for things in the shops (no point choosing between Tesco or Asda if the prices are fixed)?

Dictating what we can earn?

Preventing us from drinking or smoking (I do neither which is lucky as we won't have the choice to soon)?

Dictating what we can eat (I am partial to the odd biscuit so this one will hit me)?

No doubt mandating exercise, fixing our bed times and taking our children away from us in case we suggest to them that they should be allowed their own independent thoughts and choices...and of course cameras and identity cards to make sure we comply

I suggest the sheep stay and the rest of us vote with our feet. The pound may not go far and no doubt exchange controls will be imposed but surely a life free to make one's own choices as many died for only 70 years ago is worth starting again from scratch for?

Hmm. I can tick almost every item in there off in recent news reports. :eek:

b0rker

In fact. The more I read this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/mortgages/5001536/The-FSA-mortgage-cap-how-it-affects-you.html

The more I think this this whole piece has been written by some mad bear, or possibly some mad tory, with a huge agenda.

If what is suggested in this Q&A then it would put pretty much everyone who bought after 2000 in massive negative equity.

In fact if this does pan out to be a load of rubbish (which considering the negative impact it would have it can only be) then the ToryGrpah should really be held to account for some very irresponsible and sensationalist journalisim.

But I will wait until it is reported by the BBC or someone with a less baised editorial until I become concerned.

baileysbattlebus

chucky wrote: »

no problem - i posted it the other day but it was laughed at as it was innacurate
even though it takes stats from nearly 30 million people.

Mitchaa has quoted it many a time but it's ignored as it doesn't fit peoples HPC agenda

We live in the Wokingham Authority area and according to ASHE the mean salary here for a full time work is £41.7k, that is probably about right. It's not a million miles away I wouldn't have thought.

Median about £32k - that's probably about right too. Daugter's partner earns about £33k and isn't well paid by any means. She earns £21k and she isn't well paid at all.

I think the house prices and rents to large extent reflect the salaries. 3 bed terraces in the same road, it's council housing but I think most of them are privately owned now, this is the lower end of the 3 bed market both to rent and buy, this is in Woodley which is where we live. We won't go into the top end.

To buy -

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-19581683.html?locationIdentifier=REGION%5E27364&sortByPriceDescending=false&minBedrooms=3&maxBedrooms=3&pageNumber=1&backToListURL=%2Fproperty-for-sale%2Ffind.html%3FsearchType%3DSALE%26locationIdentifier%3DREGION%255E27364%26radius%3D0.0%26displayPropertyType%3D%26minBedrooms%3D3%26maxBedrooms%3D3%26minPrice%3D%26maxPrice%3D%26maxDaysSinceAdded%3D%26retirement%3D%26partBuyPartRent%3Dfalse%26_includeSSTC%3Don%26sortByPriceDescending%3Dfalse%26primaryDisplayPropertyType%3D%26secondaryDisplayPropertyType%3D%26oldDisplayPropertyType%3D%26oldPrimaryDisplayPropertyType%3D%26oldSecondaryDisplayPropertyType%3D%26newHome%3D%26auction%3Dfalse%26x%3D100%26y%3D16


To Rent - same road.
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-20446558.html?locationIdentifier=REGION%5E27364&minBedrooms=3&maxBedrooms=3&pageNumber=2&backToListURL=%2Fproperty-to-rent%2Ffind.html%3FlocationIdentifier%3DREGION%255E27364%26minBedrooms%3D3%26maxBedrooms%3D3%26index%3D10

The cheapest 3 bed to rent is £850

baileysbattlebus

b0rker wrote: »

I consider financial regulation to be a great idea. In fact with prudent financial regulation we would most likely not have ended up in this situation in the first place. What I do not think is a good idea is going from allowing 125% mortgages and 6x income multiples one year to dropping the maximum income multiple to 3x and enforcing 60% LTVs the very next year.

If there is one way to ensure mass reposession and the financial turmoil that goes hand in hand with that, welll this would be it.

A more considered and gradual deflation of the bubble is what the doctor ordered.

Thankfully I think that is what Gordon Brown has in mind despite what the ToryGraph may be reporting.

I must admit if this does come to pass and I had bought in 2006 / 2007 on a high LTV, and it halved or more the original value of my house, I would probably go bankrupt or something and then rent. Obviously get the rental before you go bankrupt. They could have the non existant equity from the house.

I would imagine thousands would do it. There would be loads of houses for sale - the repossessions would go through the roof - possibly not because people couldn't pay but wouldn't pay.

moggylover

chucky wrote: »

it's here Big G - i'm sure people won't like reading it
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_labour/ASHE_2008/tab7_7a.xls

Grrr! I SO want to read that but I can't seem to open it:mad:

mitchaa

moggylover wrote: »

Grrr! I SO want to read that but I can't seem to open it:mad:

You need excel to open the table

moggylover

mitchaa wrote: »

You need excel to open the table

I haven't got that:( - can you get free downloads?:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: