A serious question for the Bears....

FungusFighter

Bored_Poster wrote: »

Sorry nembot, I am in a difficult place at the moment.I am being sexually attracted to fungus fighter, might be time to unsuscribe.

Don't fight it sweetcheeks, it's inevitable:D

mewbie_2

Be very careful Mr. B.

mcc100

Hamish

I assume that you were one of those people with a vested interest asking the same question in the late 1980's.

I will briefly provide details of my own personal experience from that time so that people can make there own judgements.

1987 - I bought my first flat (which was modern and in a nice area) in my early twenties for £35000 after being convinced by media, estate agents, builders etc that if I did not buy then I would never be able to afford to climb onto the "property ladder"

1988 - An identical flat in my block sold for £45000

1989 - In a falling market I sold my flat for £35000. Buyers were being convinced by media, estate agents, builders etc that they should buy as the market had fallen significantly and house prices had bottomed out.

1995 - An identical flat in a neighbouring block sold for £17000

2002 - The flat that I bought in 1987 and sold in 1989 for £35000 was sold for £29000

Try asking the young female first time buyer who bought my flat in 1989 and sold it 13 years later at a loss of almost 20% what she thinks of your question.

chucky

julieq wrote: »

The average household income is defined on the website of the office for national statistics. It's about £35K.

the average household income for a new mortgage is £38k, so that makes sense

Graham's issues come from that this figure is too high and that single people earning less than this should be able to buy :rolleyes:

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

chucky wrote: »

the average household income for a new mortgage is £38k, so that makes sense

Graham's issues come from that this figure is too high and that single people earning less than this should be able to buy :rolleyes:

You can see why they all moan about it, on the surface it is true that a young single person on 24K has no way of competing with a young family on 38K.

But of course the family on 38K shouldn't be competing for the same properties as the single person.

A single person only really needs a one bed flat. They may want more than this, but they usually don't need it.

A family will almost always need more than a one bed flat. At least a two or three bed flat, or a small house.

So in terms of housing needs, they are not competing for the same properties anyway, therefore it shouldn't be a problem.

And when there is such a shortage of housing, surely this just means we will use what we have more efficiently.

Graham_Devon

Hamish, care to answer now? Or admit you didnt have a clue what you were going on about?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

You can see why they all moan about it, on the surface it is true that a young single person on 24K has no way of competing with a young family on 38K.

But of course the family on 38K shouldn't be competing for the same properties as the single person.

A single person only really needs a one bed flat. They may want more than this, but they usually don't need it.

A family will almost always need more than a one bed flat. At least a two or three bed flat, or a small house.

So in terms of housing needs, they are not competing for the same properties anyway, therefore it shouldn't be a problem.

And when there is such a shortage of housing, surely this just means we will use what we have more efficiently.

Answer what Graham?

andykn

nembot wrote: »

I'm still waiting to find out why ridiculously overpriced houses are a good thing for the country.

You need to find someone first who says they are and ask them.

andykn

mcc100 wrote: »

Try asking the young female first time buyer who bought my flat in 1989 and sold it 13 years later at a loss of almost 20% what she thinks of your question.

I would imagine she's delighted at having saved so much money over renting over that timescale.

I'd be fascinated to know where a flat in a nice area could be had for 29 grand in 2002.

mbga9pgf

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Do you have a "Plan B"?

And what is it?

I'm not meaning this to be a thread about whether or not we have reached bottom, or whether or not prices will rise or fall.

Just a hypothetical thread about what those of you that don't currently own would do if it turns out that the botom was last February, and prices that are now 8.5% higher than then actually keep rising from here.

At what point would you admit defeat, or rather, if prices keep rising at what point what you feel that you can't risk letting them get back to peak prices without you acting and at least realising some of the gains you could have had?

Is there such a point? Or are you willing to let prices get back to peak or higher before you finally buy?

And if so, is it because you have a greater fear of buying and then losing as prices fall, than you have of paying more as prices rise but at least being sure that prices won't fall?

Genuinely curious as to what your motivations are.

Emmigration.

Have the option of walking into a civvie job earning 100K+ tax free per annum. 5 years of that and my plan b would be to emmigrate to either NZ, Canada or even france.