A question for the regulars planning to buy houses

Thrugelmir

mr_fishbulb wrote: »

Where has everyone else's input got the board? As fas as I can see, no one has changed their mind about the crash.


After reading all the posts about how much of their life bears are wasting whilst waiting for more falls, I'm beginning to wonder how much of my life I am wasting trying to interpret any new information amongst all the inane arguments.

The fundamentals issues that in part caused the "crash" have yet to be tackled. We only just leaving intensive care in a broad sense. (We could yet relapse as we only need one mad terrorist group to pull a stunt somewhere in the world).

I'm negative not bearish on the broader UK economy. We have an issue that can't be swept under the carpet indefinately.

DEBT.

Until the future becomes clearer its difficult to be bullish on the prospects for the UK on a macro level.

chucky

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

Kinda feeling this thread (and forum) is to do more w money than lifestyle choice imo. pretty sure as a lifestyle choice neither renting nor owning are inherently superior

pretty obvious assumption and a right one too.

those that deny that it's not about the money are deluding themselves otherwise they would have bought recently when mortgage rates were much cheaper.

Thrugelmir

chucky wrote: »

pretty obvious assumption and a right one too.

those that deny that it's not about the money are deluding themselves otherwise they would have bought recently when mortgage rates were much cheaper.

Security in life is a regular job and income.

A house merely gives security to your creditors.

the_ash_and_the_oak

chucky wrote: »

pretty obvious assumption and a right one too.

those that deny that it's not about the money are deluding themselves otherwise they would have bought recently when mortgage rates were much cheaper.

confused by this post. are you saying it is or it isn't about money?

not really sure why it follows that they would or wouldnt have bought for financial reasons when rates were cheaper either (either because they are giving greater weight to other factors, or they were giving greater weight to mortgage rates but miscalculated). not really sure why you are saying not buying in march 2009 is a non-financial decision (if that is what you are saying)

chucky

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

confused by this post. are you saying it is or it isn't about money?

not really sure why it follows that they would or wouldnt have bought for financial reasons when rates were cheaper either (either because they are giving greater weight to other factors, or they were giving greater weight to mortgage rates but miscalculated). not really sure why you are saying not buying in march 2009 is a non-financial decision (if that is what you are saying)

i don't think it is about money - for most it seems to be about believing that houses are expensive (which they always have been in most places) and not wanting to get mortgaged up to buy a property.

PasturesNew

If I were young and full of hope right now, in the place I grew up in, even 4x my salary with a 10% deposit would only get me half of a small 1-bed flat.

There must be thousands of people "making do" with the other half they have JUST to be able to afford to buy a place.

Mr_Matey

PasturesNew wrote: »

There must be thousands of people "making do" with the other half they have JUST to be able to afford to buy a place.

Maybe that's why the divorce rate in the UK is so high. Once the mortgage is paid off they don't have to "make do" with the other half anymore.

the_ash_and_the_oak

chucky wrote: »

i don't think it is about money - for most it seems to be about believing that houses are expensive (which they always have been in most places) and not wanting to get mortgaged up to buy a property.

People will always have non-financial aspects to consider I agree - but its not really possible to debate those imo, not really interested in debating lifestyle choices per se. I can only really debate from a money perspective tbh (whatever lifestyle choice I might make isn't really debatable particularly)

I don't think houses themselves have always been expensive, I think there have been times when houses have been cheap but that the money to buy them with has been expensive (which has a similar but not identical effect imo)

chucky

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

I don't think houses themselves have always been expensive, I think there have been times when houses have been cheap but that the money to buy them with has been expensive (which has a similar but not identical effect imo)

it's a shame that many on this forum don't understand this - unfortunately they are the most vocal :rolleyes:

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

i don't think it is about money - for most it seems to be about believing that houses are expensive (which they always have been in most places) and not wanting to get mortgaged up to buy a property.

Theres a huge difference between "not getting morgated up" and being responsible.

Theres also a huge different between "not getting mortgaged up" and simply not being able to afford to get mortgaged up on the run of the mill property.

People just cannot get a mortgage because prices of the homes far outweigh wages.

I for example don't mind getting a mortgage, but there is no way in hell I am going to get a mortgage in which any normal life event, such as illness, redundancy etc, has the house taken off me within a 3 month window. I want peace of mind, and I want to be able to stand on my own feet, even in the event of an uncontrollable life event.

Indebting yourself to a point where you have literally 1-2 months to sort any potential issues out should something happen is absolute lunacy in my view. And thats what I take from your "getting mortgaged up".