The reason for my pessimistic thoughts

the_ash_and_the_oak

ess0two wrote: »

Everything in life is a gamble,when we first bought it was quite a stretch but got better over time.
People who wait for all the pieces to fit together will wait forever.

totally agree w this - should do the right things at the right times

and fair play to those that waited 07 to 09. can't really begrudge them a cheaper place on a cheaper deal imo

Oldernotwiser

ninky wrote: »

in the past the majority would have had smallholdings of land..

What past are you referring to: during the Industrial Revolution: under the feudal system? More people own property in the UK than ever before!

Pobby

Me, I don`t care about plasma flooring or hard wood tellies, ummm that went wrong somewhere. I don`t actually like " things ", just another thing to waste cash on or worry about. I do like the idea that when I was earning way over the average age I was able to put away money which will be a nice extra in retirement.

Possibly my age, but security amounts to so much more than an i-pod ever will.

Btw, I now earn less than the average wage and my wife is in a low paid part time job but I get the hump if I can`t stash a few hundred each month in savings. I guess that is one reason that it`s nice not having a mortgage.

baileysbattlebus

nightsong wrote: »

In 1982 I was earning £5,000 p.a. which I believe was around the average national wage. So Graham's father's house would have cost about 5 times the average wage.

If the average wage is now around £25,000, an equivalent house would be £125 k. So, at £168k houses ARE more expensive in real terms.

BUT - not impossibly so, surely? Presumably a 2-bed terrace would still be affordable on that basis? I think the bottom line is exactly what other posters have suggested. In order to buy a house perople used to make sacrifices. They would live very frugally for a couple of years to afford the deposit, and they would go on living frugally until such time as their pay went up. This would involve going without things - holidays, new clothes, a new car etc.

And as for my parents' generation - we didn't have TV or a car until I was five, my mother didn't have a washing machine till I was ten and we never had central heating. My father earned an average wage, my mother didn't work when I was little and they were buying a small house. This was all perfectly normal, nobody suffered and we were quite happy with our week's holiday at the British seaside, my cousin's cast-off clothes, second-hand furniture and our home-cooked meals.

The advertising industry has convinced so many people that the only way to be happy is to spend money. This is NOT TRUE.

Rant over

The average wage in England in 1982 was £154 per week or £8k per year for a man, in Scotland it was £150 per week or £7.8k a year.

For a woman it was about £5k.

I agree with the living frugally part - we bought our first house in 1982 on one income - we had 3 children under 3 at the time and boy did we go without. No new clothes for us, just the kids - and more often than not the clothes came from neighbours for them - and when we had finished with them they got passed on to someone else. I aslo worked part time in bars and shops for the grand sum of £26 a week, but it bought the food.

Holidays at my parents house on the coast. Then when we were a bit flush we bought a second hand tent. No new car - no one where we lived had 2 cars either - we walked everywhere - we were on a small new estate and most of the people living there had children and were as hard up as we were.

We had furniture because we had rented and we used the carpets from our rented house and had them fitted to our brand new house - I was gutted!!!

Peoples expectations are very different now. Most people want everything now.

socrates

ninky wrote: »

not really. mortgage companies are more interested in your income than your outgoings (unless its debt payments), so this argument doesn't hold.

in the past the majority would have had smallholdings of land. now only a few can afford such a luxury. quality of life has gone up in terms of healthcare and average life expectancy but down in terms of working hours and access to land. some might see this as a necessary price to pay but personally i don't. i've decided to keep my property ambitions moderate in terms of a place to live. like OP my parents were in a detatched 3 bed cottage by the time they were my age despite few academic qualifications and only one income whilst we live in a one bed flat with an outstanding mortgage and two incomes.

Is this in the days of Henry VIII?

ess0two

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

totally agree w this - should do the right things at the right times

and fair play to those that waited 07 to 09. can't really begrudge them a cheaper place on a cheaper deal imo

Your right but there'll be few who are still gonna sit this out,either getting a few % off,or potentially a higher IR for waiting.
Then there will some who sit too long and get back into the un-affordability cycle again.

Some here have been sitting out since 2004 or earlier,personally i'd be getting in at least end of 2010 / spring 2011.

ess0two

socrates wrote: »

Is this in the days of Henry VIII?

PMSL :beer:

SandC

Conrad wrote: »

This is so wrong Graham, and an example of you not taking charge of your pessimism.

Step back a minute and think it through.

60 years ago most people rented and had no assets. We are immensly richer now and for the majority there is inheritance as thier parents life long worth trickles down.

Quite. I was talking to my aunt the other week and she mentioned that her and my uncle bought the house that her parents previously rented. I was talking to my mum as well and she also mentioned that her parents had rented. Our parents generation bought homes, but their parents tended not to.

the_ash_and_the_oak

ess0two wrote: »

Your right but there'll be few who are still gonna sit this out,either getting a few % off,or potentially a higher IR for waiting.
Then there will some who sit too long and get back into the un-affordability cycle again.

Some here have been sitting out since 2004 or earlier,personally i'd be getting in at least end of 2010 / spring 2011.

my grandparents sold in 2004 - not sure if they're going to bother buying again or not. Worked out pretty well so far - but the lower interest rates are a concern - or at least they will start to be if they continue for more than another 2 or 3 years

baileysbattlebus

ninky wrote: »

not really. mortgage companies are more interested in your income than your outgoings (unless its debt payments), so this argument doesn't hold.

in the past the majority would have had smallholdings of land. now only a few can afford such a luxury. quality of life has gone up in terms of healthcare and average life expectancy but down in terms of working hours and access to land. some might see this as a necessary price to pay but personally i don't. i've decided to keep my property ambitions moderate in terms of a place to live. like OP my parents were in a detatched 3 bed cottage by the time they were my age despite few academic qualifications and only one income whilst we live in a one bed flat with an outstanding mortgage and two incomes.

Most people who lived in towns didn't even have gardens at the turn of the century they would have had a back yard. Have a look at some of the older terraced properties and the garden size they had.

My grandparents lived in the country and had a decent sized garden - in which they grew veg. The house was owned by the colliery not them.

In 1900 only 10% of people owned property. It's about 70% now.