We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
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!
BBC: Homes 'May rise in value in 2009'
Comments
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »Yes Dan, I know, but
Actually, nah, I can't be bothered going into this
It's obvious you are stating the obvious, but not willing to scratch the surface.
Yes Graham I am stating the obvious - something you choose to ignore/don't want to beleive.0 -
It only needs "some" people who are able to purchase to increase/ sustain houseprices
Not necessarily. If a potential buyer takes a view that something is too expensive. They'll sit on the side lines and wait. If they are still living at home for example then makes sense to continue to save.
The slack at the moment could be people who cashed out at the peak, rented, and are now purchasing again. Average mortgage advances are around 30% down compared to a year ago. Prices haven't dropped much so buyers must have a sizable deposit.
No sign that true FTB's are returning in any significant numbers.0 -
Yes Graham I am stating the obvious - something you choose to ignore/don't want to beleive.
I knew I shouldnt have got involved. :rolleyes:
I am putting my points across Dan. If you want to discuss the points, feel free. If you just want to state an obvious fact and then go personal ignoring all my points, thats up to you. Feel free to talk about the realities, if not, feel free to call me stupid for getting involved when I knew I shouldnt!0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »and in the same article"It is unlikely the price increases can be sustained for long at the very strong rate observed over the last few months," he said.
We realise this, hence why we say there will be likely falls and that we are stagnating :wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »We need affordable prices before stability.
No good having stable prices well above the affordability line....as with that at some point, yet again, something has to give.
As we discussed on the other thread, what may need to give is the ability for people to buy property.
House prices are a market and are governed by the supply and demand.
House prices do not have to drop so that a great proportion of the population can afford to buy.
You'll either be able to afford the market rate or not.:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »You need people to buy the starter homes in order to relieve those outgrowing the starter homes to move up. Agreed
In other words, you need a First Time Buyer continual influx. Agreed - and that is what's happening
We have not had this for the last 5 years (rubbish - where did you get that from?), and it's not about to start now. If we havent had it for the last 5 years, it's not going to happen when 125% mortgages have been pulled and 75% are norm.(are you making this up?)
Like I said, you need to scracth the surface instead of stating the obvious of "some people can afford houses"....cus some people will always be able to afford houses. Some people will be able to afford whole streets and some people will be able to afford their first home - therefore sustaining house prices. It certainly isn't the case that if some people cannot afford to purchase, then the entire market will crash as you seem to be suggesting.
see above.............0 -
dgl, how about I just agree you are correct?0
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »I knew I shouldnt have got involved. :rolleyes:
I am putting my points across Dan. If you want to discuss the points, feel free. If you just want to state an obvious fact and then go personal ignoring all my points, thats up to you. Feel free to talk about the realities, if not, feel free to call me stupid for getting involved when I knew I shouldnt!
Why do you ignore the facts when they are presented to you in black and white. You then state "oh buts thats obvious" - if it was that obvious to you, why did you leave it out of your post when commenting on affordability.
At the end of the day, people can afford to buy property and they are - whether you like it or not.0 -
You are correct too Dan. Some people can afford to buy and they are 0
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »You need people to buy the starter homes in order to relieve those outgrowing the starter homes to move up.
In other words, you need a First Time Buyer continual influx.
There are also downsizers and potentially with the baby boomers, there are a lot of them that will be competing with FTBers.
I do agree however that you need an influx of FTBers to replace the people who leave the property ladder forever.
I think the next cycle is going to be very very interesting when we see the baby boomers start to die off and increase the supply of properties:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.2K Life & Family
- 258K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards