We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
More average salary stats to argue over.....
Comments
-
-
-
No I don't have that data. It may be available, I don't know. I'm sure it could be worked out via the Land Registry data though which is arguably more accurate.
Anyway, my point was that "Haliwide" go on average house prices, and people use that figure by which to judge the prices of a typical house.
Mean isn't typical, where as median is. As I've mentioned average prices aren't representative, as the value is skewed by expensive, 1mil plus houses for example. It's the same with salaries.
I'm just mentioning in the context of this thread regarding salaries, which in turn became about house prices.
What confused me was you specifcally mentioned median house prices:I used the median earnings, but show me where I mentioned average house prices. If you check my later posts you'll see I talk about median earnings and median house prices.
Average values can be skewed to easily so are not representative. The majority of houses and salaries are in the lower end of the market and the median reflects this much better.
My point is that you cannot use median salaries and mean house prices and anyway the populations (house buyers vs wage earners) are different.0 -
My point is that you cannot use median salaries and mean house prices
Of course not, but they'll keep trying anyway.:D
Without such meaningless comparisons, they have no case.and anyway the populations (house buyers vs wage earners) are different.
Of course they are. As the CML average loan figures show very clearly, houses were never unnafordable for actual house buyers, as loans never crossed 3.5 times income even at peak.
What they seem to be arguing is that a greater percentage of the population should be able to afford a house.
Given that house ownership as a percentage of the population is close to an all time high, that argument also lacks veracity.
The facts are clear.
-Home ownership as a percentage of population is close to an all time high.
-Average loan size never crossed 3.5 times income even at peak.
More people have been able to buy a house than at any point in history, so what on earth do the bears want now? Free houses with a box of cereal?:rotfl:“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Of course not, but they'll keep trying anyway.:D
Without such meaningless comparisons, they have no case.
Of course they are. As the CML average loan figures show very clearly, houses were never unnafordable for actual house buyers, as loans never crossed 3.5 times income even at peak.
What they seem to be arguing is that a greater percentage of the population should be able to afford a house.
Given that house ownership as a percentage of the population is close to an all time high, that argument also lacks veracity.
The facts are clear.
-Home ownership as a percentage of population is close to an all time high.
-Average loan size never crossed 3.5 times income even at peak.
More people have been able to buy a house than at any point in history, so what on earth do the bears want now? Free houses with a box of cereal?:rotfl:
No !!!!!! sherlock. Someone who could afford a house found the house affordable.
Sometimes your genius really does knock me back a step or two.
Always wondered how someone I know bought a ferrari. You cleared it up for me now! He could afford it! :idea:0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »No !!!!!! sherlock. Someone who could afford a house found the house affordable.
Sometimes your genius really does knock me back a step or two.
Always wondered how someone I know bought a ferrari. You cleared it up for me now! He could afford it! :idea:
Way to go changing the subject again. Mislead, distract, change topic.
You really are a master debater......:rolleyes:“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
baileysbattlebus wrote: »I just use all of them to see the general trend - they all tend to follow the same path.
Indeed they do:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Way to go changing the subject again. Mislead, distract, change topic.
You really are a master debater......:rolleyes:
How did I change the subject exactly?
Or is that your line now whenever I pick you up on stuff?0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »How did I change the subject exactly?
Or is that your line now whenever I pick you up on stuff?
No, it's what I'll continue using every time you fail to address the topic being discussed, which you do often.
Lets try again......
As the CML average loan figures show very clearly, houses were never unnafordable for actual house buyers, as loans never crossed 3.5 times income even at peak.
What they seem to be arguing is that a greater percentage of the population should be able to afford a house.
Given that house ownership as a percentage of the population is close to an all time high, that argument also lacks veracity.
The facts are clear.
-Home ownership as a percentage of population is close to an all time high.
-Average loan size never crossed 3.5 times income even at peak.
More people have been able to buy a house than at any point in history, so what on earth do the bears want now? Free houses with a box of cereal?:rotfl:“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »No, it's what I'll continue using every time you fail to address the topic being discussed, which you do often.
Lets try again...... Oooo, lets
As the CML average loan figures show very clearly, houses were never unnafordable for actual house buyers, as loans never crossed 3.5 times income even at peak.
What they seem to be arguing is that a greater percentage of the population should be able to afford a house.
Given that house ownership as a percentage of the population is close to an all time high, that argument also lacks veracity.
The facts are clear.
-Home ownership as a percentage of population is close to an all time high.
-Average loan size never crossed 3.5 times income even at peak.
More people have been able to buy a house than at any point in history, so what on earth do the bears want now? Free houses with a box of cereal?:rotfl:
No !!!!!! sherlock. Someone who could afford a house found the house affordable.
Sometimes your genius really does knock me back a step or two.
Always wondered how someone I know bought a ferrari. You cleared it up for me now! He could afford it! :idea:0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards