Halifax +2.6 % MoM

the_ash_and_the_oak

well true but nationwide are concentrated in the south which has higher incomes and halifax concentrated on the north with lower incomes - should even out somewhat

chucky

lostinrates wrote: »

Isn't it important what national average incomes are as well as average mortgage incomes? If not why not? I understand (and agree) buying will never be for everyone, but then, rent paying will be. (or is housing benefit significnt enough to negate the impact of that on potentil rental yields). None of these are leading questions, just genuine acceptance of lack of knowledge.

not sure about average mortgage incomes - it gets complex when you compare it against different types of properties.
so not sure how the average income would be relevant and probably less relevant when you have two incomes because you'd have double the purchasing power.

different salaries would buy you different properties and in different regions - i wouldn't take much notice of national average salaries when comparing with house prices. it's very difficult to get a decent perspective on it.
i'd much rather compare regional or local average salaries.

the_ash_and_the_oak

chucky wrote: »

i think it would have to be - an assumption on my part but i would have thought that most property was bought on two incomes or jointly.

here is the bit that people don't understand the affordability - it's not just about single affordability.

so kinda houses at 4x household salary and flats at...4x individual?

nearlynew

chucky wrote: »

i
here is the bit that people don't understand the affordability - it's not just about single affordability.

.

And that, my friend, sums up how we have been shafted.

Ignoring the financial side, the social consequences of such a shift from single to dual incomes needed to buy a house have been horrific.

I think this picture illustrates it quite well.

chucky

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

so kinda houses at 4x household salary and flats at...4x individual?

without saying that right or wrong it sort of explains what's a FTB homes and the housing ladder.

it's too simplistic to compare average salary and average house prices - it's a good sound bite to say that houses are unaffordable but it doesn't really explain everything.

the_ash_and_the_oak

chucky wrote: »

without saying that right or wrong it sort of explains what's a FTB homes and the housing ladder.

it's too simplistic to compare average salary and average house prices - it's a good sound bite to say that houses are unaffordable but it doesn't really explain everything.

prob fair tbh. just curious when 1 bed flats became ftb homes and how thats worked out

the_ash_and_the_oak

especially in regard to the length of time a ftb might expect to stay in a flat and how much actual capital they might expect to pay off during that time

lostinrates

chucky wrote: »

not sure about average mortgage incomes - it gets complex when you compare it against different types of properties.
so not sure how the average income would be relevant and probably less relevant when you have two incomes because you'd have double the purchasing power.

different salaries would buy you different properties and in different regions - i wouldn't take much notice of national average salaries when comparing with house prices. it's very difficult to get a decent perspective on it.
i'd much rather compare regional or local average salaries.

yes sorry....I agree, but reading my goobledigook:o with regional average slaries for ''national average salaries? Is there not an impact for amount available to pay rent, or is this negted by Housing benefit? (still not a leading question).

chucky

lostinrates wrote: »

yes sorry....I agree, but reading my goobledigook:o with regional average slaries for ''national average salaries? Is there not an impact for amount available to pay rent, or is this negted by Housing benefit? (still not a leading question).

i'm thinking that renting has less "costs" involved - putting a deposit together etc... renters and buyers have the same disposable income just that buying incurs other outgoings. long term these are got back through HPI and renting becomes less attractive.

lostinrates

chucky wrote: »

i'm thinking that renting has less "costs" involved - putting a deposit together etc... renters and buyers have the same disposable income just that buying incurs other outgoings. long term these are got back through HPI and renting becomes less attractive.

Fewer costs:p (I know glass houses and stones)

.hmm. I don't know.

If renters include those who can't afford to buy, doesn't that drag down an average? meaning they don't hav same disposable income?

Also, although renting some argue costs less monthly, I'm not sure it always does.