Property Obsession

wageslave

Cleaver wrote: »

Still doing something though innit?

Mrs C worked for a company who had a share save scheme a few years ago. We knew the basics that we couldn't lose and just pumped in the max each month. To cut a long story short we put in around £8,000 and got back over £30,000 when the shares were delisted as the company got taken over. We did nothing. Nada. No research or anything. Just complete and utter luck. Do you think that seems plain wrong too?

I ask as a genuine question, not really in an argumentative mood this evening.

I have profited from sharesave and inherited both money and land. Never felt it made me a bad person, just a fortunate one.

Rightly or wrongly we see BTL landlords as exploiting the less fortunate amongst us.

I think bumpoowee hit the nail square on the head. Most of us have rented property at one time or another and not been overly impressed by the professionalism of our landlords. The bad taste it left in our mouths lingers.

Cleaver

bigheadxx wrote: »

Well yes but this government should know that the game is up and start acting in the long term interest of the country.

You could argue that the government is there to act on the wish of the people. I reckon most people would want to see their house price remain high and thus the government reacts accordingly.

wageslave

Cleaver wrote: »

You could argue that the government is there to act on the wish of the people. I reckon most people would want to see their house price remain high and thus the government reacts accordingly.

You see that bit I have never understood. Unless I sell my house and go live in a tent somewhere it's monetary value is irrelevant.

Cleaver

wageslave wrote: »

You see that bit I have never understood. Unless I sell my house and go live in a tent somewhere it's monetary value is irrelevant.

That's the pragmatic, sensible view. The more human, and common, thought is that something you own is worth more than it was previously, which is generally considered a 'good thing'.

wageslave

Cleaver wrote: »

That's the pragmatic, sensible view. The more human, and common, thought is that something you own is worth more than it was previously, which is generally considered a 'good thing'.

There is no need to call me sensible Cleaver. I have been nothing but civil to you

Thrugelmir

Cleaver wrote: »

As a genuine question, why do you think there is such resentment for people who go for the easy route of making money? You'd think someone who choses the route of making the most money possible for the least effort would be congratulated. Do you think it goes back to our roots, our grandfathers earning an honest crust doing 12 hours a day on the factory floor?

For example, if someone sits on their backside investing in shares for a living they tend to get lauded as a shrewd, intelligent, clever person who makes money from the financial markets. Propety, both doing up and selling / buying and for rental, seems quite a lot of work in comparison and gives you quite a bad reputation.

No resentment. If there is an opportunity take it. Many property investors haven't actually made money yet it. As its all paper profit. Its not possible for everyone to be a winner as there just isn't the money available to support the market valuation. Its worth remembering that the value of all UK housing exceeds the value of the companies listed on the UK and European bourses. Quite a thought.

People that make money out of share dealing, by this I assume you mean City workers, in themselves have a skill set for the job. Few make the top in this field just like any other.

Cleaver

wageslave wrote: »

There is no need to call me sensible Cleaver. I have been nothing but civil to you

Please accept my apologies.

We bought our flat for around £80k and it's probably worth about £70k or less now, which is relevant for us as I think we're going to sell it and buy a house. Which seems a bit of a kick in the teeth.

We've seen a house we think we might make an offer on this week, which is a repo and was on for £225k 18 months ago and is now down to £175k. We're thinking of going in at £150k. So house prices falling since we bought our flat (right at the very peak of the peak, 'cos we're smart like that) mght actually mean that this house is cheaper that it would have been if houses had risen over the last two years, even though we'd feel 'richer' as our flat would be worth more than we paid for it. If you see what I mean.

We could have rented I guess, but we don't have a mortgage on this flat, so maybe not. And I hate renting. But then we'd not have paid service charge if we'd rented. But... Oh I dunno. Who cares. I can't work it out. It's late. Someone else do the maths. I'm going to bed.

Afriend_2

wageslave wrote: »

You see that bit I have never understood. Unless I sell my house and go live in a tent somewhere it's monetary value is irrelevant.

I think peoples thought process works more along the lines of; if I were to close this position (i.e. sell the house), would I have more or less than I started with.

Whether it's sensible IMO depends on whether home ownership (or more to the point the purchase of another home) is seen as essential.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

wageslave wrote: »

I think it is the whole amateur landlord/ doer-upper that sets peoples teeth on edge. Doing something badly and still making money at it just seems plain wrong.

We admire excellence and are happy to see it rewarded. Mediocrity not so much.........

I actually think it runs deeper than that.

There is a peculiar resentment in Britain against success. As a nation, we don't seem to like people that take risks and make money. Calling them "chancers" or "spivs" or "amateurs", etc.

We tend to glamorise the underdog.

Which I don't think is entirely healthy.

Thrugelmir

Cleaver wrote: »

That doesn't really illustrate my point though. As long as the practice is legal, and in a very general way, most people would opt to make as much money as possible for doing as little as possible. Property has been a way to do this for 10 or so years and I was just questioning why it is derided so much.

Edit: Sorry, I should have probably used another example. Let's take entrepreneurs who come up with a simple yet genius idea / object that they then sell to make a fortune. Very little 'work' involved for some of these, yet I think we would all congratulate them. Why is making money from property any different?

It can cost a £100k plus to pay for a patent. So where does that funding come from? An idea costs nothing, to make it into a valuable product costs money.