***House prices up 1.2% in May***

System

Banderman wrote: »

Can someone translate please? thanks,

Seller made more money, can clear more debts.

ad9898_3

pickles110564 wrote: »

Another I want it all now poster.

Don't get ya, if you had the opportunity to have what you wanted, mortgage free within 3 years wouldn't you want it ?, assuming you have a mortgage, of course you may not, in which case if you own outright, you will know the benefits of being in that position, and surely understand why others would want the same, don't ya ?

lostinrates

ad9898 wrote: »

TBH, I like the banter that surrounds the release of the Haliwide figures, of course I'm on the side of wanting prices to fall, but it doesn't bother me that much one way or another, I'm in a position to buy now if I wanted but feel if I can hold out for 2-3 years I will be able to buy the 3 bed detached I want mortgage free, as long as we don't get any 2001-2007 HPI again, which I'm sure most will admit is pretty unlikely. If this was the bottom (and I don't think it is) then I'd be ok with stagnation over a period of years.

I think buyers like us though are fairly few and far between. I've not tallied up but I guess there might be fewer of us saving a deposit next door in buying and renting than their are people saying ''I have £5k and want to buy'' or sking about various schemes and whatnots, or even 95-125% mortgages.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

pickles110564 wrote: »

Another I want it all now poster.

Can't you read? They don't want "it" now; they are prepared to wait a couple of years.

ad9898_3

lostinrates wrote: »

I think buyers like us though are fairly few and far between. I've not tallied up but I guess there might be fewer of us saving a deposit next door in buying and renting than their are people saying ''I have £5k and want to buy'' or sking about various schemes and whatnots, or even 95-125% mortgages.

I'll be honest, the thought of buying anywhere, certainly at this time with a 90% LTV mortgage, chills me to the bone, and can't understand people wanting to do it at this point in the economic cycle, I'm sure people realise that you have earn at least £3 for every £1 you borrow on a mortgage to pay it off. I don't like working in my job that much to do that.

Banderman

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Seller made more money, can clear more debts.

What about the buyer then? He's paid more so is in more debt. How's it 'win, win, allround'?

lostinrates

ad9898 wrote: »

I'll be honest, the thought of buying anywhere, certainly at this time with a 90% LTV mortgage, chills me to the bone, and can't understand people wanting to do it at this point in the economic cycle, I'm sure people realise that you have earn at least £3 for every £1 you borrow on a mortgage to pay it off. I don't like working in my job that much to do that.

Well, I think its likely we might be going for the big mortage thing and never moving. Its not ideal: but there you are. Depends, if we buy this year we are more restricted in lending, so lower mortage multiple, but still laregr than I'd consider for a normal domestic property.

princeofpounds

Indeed, take all this "good for future society" stuff with a pinch of salt, it's more like "I want a cheap house, at the expense of existing society".

Not at all. Why be caustic and personal about it? For all you know, I own ten houses! I don't get that close unfortunately

It's not a case of wanting a cheap house for myself. It's a case of wanting a cheap house for everyone, for the entire future.

Sure, I'd like to buy a small mansion on a year's wages. But you must ask yourself... wouldnt you too?

Thrugelmir

Banderman wrote: »

Can someone translate please? thanks,

Somebody has sold an overpriced asset to another party who has borrowed a huge amount of money to do so. The party that sold aren't in as much debt as they would have been in they had sold it for its true worth. So us the taxpayers won't have to find so much to bail the banks out when they declare themselves bankrupt. Meanwhile the party that bought the overpriced asset is now taking the chance that they will be able to repay the debt.

Simply put its pass the parcel.... except the party holding the parcel when the music finally stops finds that they're holding a bomb not a prize.

themanbearpig

Joeskeppi wrote: »

Indeed, take all this "good for future society" stuff with a pinch of salt, it's more like "I want a cheap house, at the expense of existing society".

Yes, that's sort of correct, but more accurately:

"I want a cheap house, at the expense of baby boomer generation"


Because they have screwed over the current society, and tomorrows, for their own selfish economic gains.
I want to see them lose 75% of their paper wealth, and give the younger generation a chance.

National debts created today will still be in force well after the boomer generation are dead, and the new generations will have to pick up the pieces. How is that fair?