Nationwide - up 0.9% MoM

lostinrates

StevieJ wrote: »

LIR, did you remember the apple

I'm trying to be good. Not buy favour with fruit

Dithering_Dad

chewmylegoff wrote: »

well, everyone has their own definition of intelligent conversation; for instance, i would not categorise your rubbish outburst as intelligent, but others may disagree. i guess you need to have been to brookes to "get" your repartie?

To be fair, while Sir Humph has a different viewpoint from mine on the Housing market, I've always found his posts to be intelligently worded and pretty polite.

Really2

lostinrates wrote: »

Exactly: one of the reasons why getting on ladder in the last few years would have been a bad move for us: we HAVE moved a lot! A sizable minority have to. Thats part of why that house prices and equivalent risk savings/investments should stay connected for a lot of young professionals

You see i am from not from the south east, It seems a totaly differnet beast to most of the rest of the UK.

Most from around my parts never leave their home town, nevermind county.

Dan:_4

SingleSue wrote: »

I think I said as much in Jan but it was the 3 months of upwards prices in early 1990 which convinced us the worst was over and we purchased.

Prices had only fallen around 4% by early 1990, so the crash hadn't really started at this stage.

setmefree2

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

To be fair, while Sir Humph has a different viewpoint from mine on the Housing market, I've always found his posts to be intelligently worded and pretty polite.

Hear hear

Really2

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

To be fair, while Sir Humph has a different viewpoint from mine on the Housing market, I've always found his posts to be intelligently worded and pretty polite.

I must say is comments about I know richer than you to the other poster was not very polite.

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Look mate, I went to Oxford and knew proper rich people - including Sark landowners and the suchlike. Do you seriously think I am going to be impressed by small time BTL landlords? Bully for you, let's hope you can realise your paper gains.

That is why I butted in, to show how impolite those kind of things are.;)

Wookster

JonnyBravo wrote: »

No of course I wouldn't but then I dont agree it is simply a case of comparing that stat alone.
a) Is it currently 5.5x?

You're right - its not a simple case of comparing data alone. Averages are just that - there will be more affected and less affected areas.

Is it 5.5X well have a look at that math...

JonnyBravo wrote: »

b) What proportion of households now have 2 incomes compared to the "long term average"?

As has been posted already if it is 3.5X + 1X then the long term average is ~4.5X (I used the average male wage which is a bit higher than the average female wage) meaning current prices are still significantly over the long term average, though demographics in house purchases are changing with the break up of the family unit.

This would imply another fall over ~20% at least to hit the long term average.

In a correcting market, the pendulum will always swing to the underside and given that this recession is already worse than that of the 90s its hard to see how the swing could be less severe.

My money is on another 30-40% to go.

(Also the notion that house prices will recover in late 2009/ early 2010 is quite fanciful - they fell for ~3 years in the 90s and this slump is much worse, and global).

JonnyBravo wrote: »

Hahahahaha

I don't think this situation is very funny, do you?

StevieJ

ad44downey wrote: »

There's only one appropriate word to describe house prices:

TIMBER!!!!!!!!!!

Looks like Downey has been !!!!!!!! in the woods with the other bears

Dithering_Dad

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I wouldn't want to, but these days with the schooling system randomly scattering your kids about the country, and job security now being measured against the half life of beryllium, you need to be able to up sticks if needed.

If their lives are so fluid, they'd be better off remaining in rented accomodation then, surely?

With kids schooling, they're in Primary for what, 6 years and then secondary education for the same again? I would have thought that most parents would want to be static for at least during those period. My job is pretty fluid, but I try to make sure it doesn't impact my family too much. I travel while my wife and kids stay put.

Different strokes for different folks I guess. Gone are the days when your kids go to the nearest school (and walk there and back) - though saying that, both of mine walk to their primary & high school, no Chelsea Tractors for us

lostinrates

Really2 wrote: »

You see i am from not from the south east, It seems a totaly differnet beast to most of the rest of the UK.

Most from around my parts never leave their home, town nevermind county.

ROFL. Yes, everyone in London/ SE is born and bred, educated and will retire within the south east? I accept that the majority of you area may stay put, but I also counter a sizable population of the SE is made up of the minority of movers/temporary stayers from elsewhere!

ETA: furthermore, the disconnect between ares in a more mobile society is also valid