Typical wage £20K. Typical house £150K

Phirefly

wageslave wrote: »

Just build bliddy LA housing and then people wouldn't be forced into making untenable choices

This doesn't sound like a solution to me. You hit the nail on the head in your previous post:

wageslave wrote: »

Mr A earns £18k a year. His missus earns £5k on Tesco checkout. They have two kids and are living in private rented accommodation. Traditionally they would have been in social housing but that avenue is closed to them. In consequence they have no security of tenure and Mrs A cant sleep for worrying about it.

If Mrs. A lived in Germany or Scandinavia for example, she wouldn't expect the state to supplement her family's housing expenses nor expect houses to be affordable with a low income. She'd be having a very good nights sleep in her well-maintained, affordable, secure privately rented home. Which is how it should be in the UK.

wageslave

lostinrates wrote: »

, but before we were nesters we were nomads as Sarah's children.

You and I will need to be both seriously mobile if the BNP ever get elected.

My money is on my lot, we still have the caravan;)

BTW...I really was trying to stick u for you with that quote in your sig:o .

I know you were. It tickled me.

God help me if you ever go on the attack:rotfl:

wageslave

Phirefly wrote: »

If Mrs. A lived in Germany or Scandinavia for example, she wouldn't expect the state to supplement her family's housing expenses

Council housing shouldn't necessarily cost the tax payer anything as long as you remove the right to buy. Charge a reasonable rent for council houses and you should turn a profit.

After all isn't that what private landlords are doing? Charging reasonable rents:rolleyes:

And according to the ones that post on here they are all on a nice little earner.

lieutenant_dan

skiTTish wrote: »

My post pointed out that people on low income have never been able to afford to buy houses and that that's the way it is and the way it should be !!
Why would anyone ever aspire for greater things if anyone on a low wage could afford everything they wanted ?!?!
We were on a low wage in social housing ,we were not happy so hubby retrained and changed career,I got a job,doubled our income and now we have bought a house ,we didn't sit about whinging that hubby worked hard but we couldn't afford to buy ,we just did something about it and are happier for it .

That's simply not true.

I know of factory workers/meat packers etc who are in their 50s/60s who are living in 2/3 bed houses worth in excess of £200k now. Who moved into these properties on their extremely modest salaries.

To say low income workers have "never" been able to afford houses is wrong if you go back 20 to 30 years ago.

No doubt it wasn't easy for these types of people and this was before the proliferation of easy credit, and credit cards were unheard of, so they had to live within their means. But still the opportunity was there at least, something many have not been able to say for over 10 years and this continues to be the case with the mortgage market also becoming much tighter.

It's almost like money has taken on a different value too, as a home is the number 1 thing people will spend the greatest proportion of their salary on and a reflection of their status. I mean is a decent salary really "decent" if it allows the first time buyer worker to "only" buy a flat and not a house? Whereas in previous times modest workers were buying houses. That is almost a role reversal of the argument you suggest of aspiring to greater things with progression in employment being reflected in your accomodation.

carolt

Yup, my dad was a manual worker on average salary and managed to buy a nice 3 bed semi in a nice zone 3 nw London suburb. On one salary only, as wives' salaries were not allowed to be taken into account.

Price now? 500K+.

Price then? No more than 3 x average manual worker's salary. Let's be generous, and say the average manual worker now earns 30K. (Though I doubt it.) So equivalent value - no more than 100K, allowing for deposit.

But it's 5 x that.

What a loud of nonsense skiTTish's post was.

the_ash_and_the_oak

carolt wrote: »

Yup, my dad was a manual worker on average salary and managed to buy a nice 3 bed semi in a nice zone 3 nw London suburb. On one salary only, as wives' salaries were not allowed to be taken into account.

Price now? 500K+.

Price then? No more than 3 x average manual worker's salary. Let's be generous, and say the average manual worker now earns 30K. (Though I doubt it.) So equivalent value - no more than 100K, allowing for deposit.

But it's 5 x that.

What a loud of nonsense skiTTish's post was.

in your opinion

1) How much was the credit to buy it with
2) Why if houses were cheaper were owner occupany stats lower?

Old_Slaphead

That's London for you carolt.

Round here - starter homes £100-£120k with a decent semi for £150-£200k tops.

Just about within reach of average worker (if they had a decent deposit and a job that is).

Dave101t

all my older siblings bought smallish properties 10 years ago at 20-30,000 each, now worth >100,000 each, good for them, me being younger i have to wait for the big crash, which may or may not happen.

lostinrates

One of the early crash property programmes featured a woan in Notting Hill, she, like her parents was a market stall holder and was selling a flat for tremendous profit that her parents? or grandparents? had bought. Can anyone remember more than me about that?

chucky

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

in your opinion

1) How much was the credit to buy it with
2) Why if houses were cheaper were owner occupany stats lower?

12% to 15% mortgage interest vs 5% mortgage interest - it wasn't cheap back in the good old days... and that was for those that could get a mortgage :rolleyes: