House Price Increases-what for?

julieq

mewbie wrote: »

Well yeah. Do you mean if we earnt what we earn now, and went back in time to 80's prices they would seem cheap? Really good point you made there julie. Do you think the 50's would be even better?

No, if you earned what you did then and knew where prices would end up, you'd have made a lot of sacrifices to get onto the ladder at the prices on offer, even at the peak of the 1980s boom.

Or probably you wouldn't. Even with perfect information on the future the uberbears would probably still reach the wrong conclusions. Odd lot.

kabayiri

julieq wrote: »

Given the dubious quality of our state education, a knowledge based economy may be asking a lot. You have to contrast the levels of skill and motivation of graduates in the UK and (for example) Shanghai, it's something we should be very worried about.

I think you are right about the wake up call Julie. When you work in an environment where you are directly competing with Chinese or Indian skilled workforce, you realise just how tough it is.

This is probably why my views differ from people here who have worked more in the public sector. We are shaped by our experiences.

The one thing I can't align when I hear it from Gordon Brown is his selective uses of the term 'Global'. He is happy to use it when comparing our financial ills with others around the world, but he doesn't seem to realise it should be a rallying call, to try and match and even better our competitors. By selling UK assets we seem to be handing our markets over to them on a plate. Have we lost the fight?

bumpoowee

Quizzical_Squirrel wrote: »

What I said was not only "garbage", it was "garbage" that went right over your head!

I was illustrating the opposite view to show how prejudiced and narrow-minded Geoffky's type of approach is.

Well his statement was narrow-minded in the sense that it's hard to make a one line statement that concisely defines a group of people, however there was a lot of truth in what he said, property + HPI is often seen as the way to make money by people who aren't smart/skilled enough to make money 'legitimately'. Whereas what you said was just silly.

SingleSue

julieq wrote: »

It's always been tough being young, and buying in the 1980s was hardly easy, yet you'd jump at those prices now if they were offered.

A lot of what's broken about this society is that people expect to be handed everything on a gilded plate - 3 bedroom detached as a first time buyer? - instead of working towards it and making sacrifices to get there. Probably that that was how your neighbours had fought their way onto the property ladder.

Inventing demons and scapegoats, whether they're BTL landlords, bank of mum and dad deposits, immigrants or whatever, masks the fact that it's always been a struggle to buy a house. You can choose to wail and gnash your teeth about that, or you can choose to get on and attempt to solve the problems. There are always options - emigration at the limit - but most people manage eventually.

My parents purchased their first home, a 3 bed semi in a good area, on one single average wage in 1969.

No help from their parents, 10% deposit.

We bought our house in early 1990 on my salary alone with a 5% deposit, although they did take my hubbies' details so he could appear on the mortgage, it was not needed for the multiples. Unfortunately, it was only a one bedroom house but it was still possible on one salary...the same house now would require two salaries of national average to purchase plus a good deposit.

LydiaJ

Similarly, my parents bought 50 years ago.

A typical salary for the kind of job my dad was doing back then is now about 30 times what it was.

The price of the house is now about 250 times what it was.

Mr_Mumble

Loan to Income chart from the recent FSA report to show those "it was just as bad in the 70s & 80s" folk they're talking twaddle:

the_ash_and_the_oak

Mr_Mumble wrote: »

Loan to Income chart from the recent FSA report to show those "it was just as bad in the 70s & 80s" folk they're talking twaddle:

Yes but the counter-argument is that the credit to buy them with has become cheaper (in inverse proportion?)

chucky

Mr_Mumble wrote: »

Loan to Income chart from the recent FSA report to show those "it was just as bad in the 70s & 80s" folk they're talking twaddle:

that's a bit one-dimensional though. mortgages rates were much higher when multiples were lower so affordability would have been tougher then probably.

ps. sorry Mr Ash just seen your post.

Really2

Van1971 wrote: »

Not necessarily, I would have to pay nearly £2K a month to rent a house like mine, my mortgage including interest is less than half!

But if you were to buy it today with a 10% deposit would that be the case?

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

that's a bit one-dimensional though. mortgages rates were much higher when multiples were lower so affordability would have been tougher then probably.

ps. sorry Mr Ash just seen your post.

I'd rather have higher rates on my loan of 2x my salary, than average rates on my loan of 5x salary.

No point in pretending todays extreme rates are normality.