BBC: Homes 'May rise in value in 2009'

chucky

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

Wonderful for the individual, society and the future generations, not.

I had considered Conrad to be a "moderate" broker, without the hard-sell, quite sensible in his thoughtful reasoning.

If that was an accurate assessment, what on earth spiel and spin are the heavy-handed salesmen up to, and what bad decisions are they leading their clients towards?

many woman want to work and just don't want to be stay at home mums or become house wives.
they want to have careers, be ambitious and do things for themselves.

it's modern life. times have changed. people just have to deal with it like it or not, be it right or wrong.

Harry_Powell

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

Gobsmacked. Utterly gobsmacked.

If it is "dumb @ss" to not rely on joint incomes, and that is the standard message being peddled by mortgage brokers when advising their clients on affordability, no wonder we have gone to hell in a handcart.

Mortgagee says "I want to borrow £80k"
Broker replies "But you can afford £160k, here it is"
"Oh, erm, ok thanks."
Puts nose harder to grindwheel.

Wonderful for the individual, society and the future generations, not.

I had considered Conrad to be a "moderate" broker, without the hard-sell, quite sensible in his thoughtful reasoning.

If that was an accurate assessment, what on earth spiel and spin are the heavy-handed salesmen up to, and what bad decisions are they leading their clients towards?

What if you're single, are you suggesting that you shack up with someone simply to ensure that if you lose your job, there is a second income available to keep you from going under?

I don't see a problem with basing a mortgage on joint incomes. Even if one person loses their job, the other can usually cover the mortgage, especially if they make cut backs and go interest only for a while until the partner finds their feet.

You also seem to suggest that couples should base their house purchase on the wage of a singleton. This might mean that they can afford to buy studio apartment instead of a 1 or 2 bed apartment, seems madness to buy a place that already too small for a couple when you can jointly afford a better place. Especially if it's just in fear of one or the other of you losing your jobs.

Do you use the same logic just in case one of you might die, or perhaps you might get divorced?

nearlynew

chucky wrote: »

many woman want to work and just don't want to be stay at home mums or become house wives.
they want to have careers, be ambitious and do things for themselves.

it's modern life. times have changed. people just have to deal with it like it or not, be it right or wrong.

That maybe the case.

But for the majority, the choice has been taken away and they now need to work whether they want to or not.

Massive HPI has been socially, as well as economically, damaging.

Dan:_4

nearlynew wrote: »

That maybe the case.

But for the majority, the choice has been taken away and they now need to work whether they want to or not.

Massive HPI has been socially, as well as economically, damaging.

Only because they want a massive house full of the latest techonolgy; holidays abroad and 2 brand new cars.

chucky

nearlynew wrote: »

That maybe the case.

But for the majority, the choice has been taken away and they now need to work whether they want to or not.

it is the case and it won't be changing very soon.

you can't be keeping women at home because you don't want them to work and stop yourself having a joint income mortgage. it's wrong - i'm sure it's against basic human rights.

Dan:_4

....and I dont think your bird would be too impressed if you cut her out the mortgage and got it alone.

Really2

nearlynew wrote: »

That maybe the case.

But for the majority, the choice has been taken away and they now need to work whether they want to or not.

Massive HPI has been socially, as well as economically, damaging.

No the choice is there and it is more of a choice than ever before.

If women were still housewives with no chance of voting or working I would say the choice as been taken away.

Massive HPI as been caused by higher disposable income.

Are you saying couples who work and have no children should be forced to being restricted to benefit people on one wage?

It is a difficult one but as far as i know we are now at least a 1.5 wage society in terms of house purchases (EG the average family income I bellive is over £30K)
single wage as been fairly irrellevent since the 70's if you ask me.

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

it is the case and it won't be changing very soon.

you can't be keeping women at home because you don't want them to work and stop yourself having a joint income mortgage. it's wrong - i'm sure it's against basic human rights.

Take one post.

Take the word context and "out of".

You end up with this.

From "not wanting to rely on" to "keep women at home, human rights" in about 10 posts.

That's pretty good going.

nearlynew

But it used to be the case that a person on an average wage could afford to buy a below average first-time home on one income.

Now, a lot of people on above average wage cannot afford even the cheapest house in their area.

Can't you see how we as a society have been played and srewed by the system?

Dan:_4

nearlynew wrote: »

But it used to be the case that a person on an average wage could afford to buy a below average first-time home on one income.

Now, a lot of people on above average wage cannot afford even the cheapest house in their area.

Can't you see how we as a society have been played and srewed by the system?

Yes I can.

But the reality is it will not change.