Winners, Losers, etc

Jonbvn

Cleaver wrote: »

Life is like a cake dear Treliac. Getting the sensible stuff right, such as the finances, is like the base of the cake. Necessary, essential, important to get right and completely vital to the cake. Without it there would be no cake. But once this is sorted the fun stuff in life is what you put on the cake: the chocolate topping, the cream, the icing. And what would a cake be like without these toppings?

Or as a friend put to me:

No romance without finance!;)

lostinrates

A well balanced cake is a fine thing indeed Cleaver, all base no filling or icing, is a bit bland, if sustaining, All icing however, is sickly and ...just sugar...you'll be in hospital in no time.

MSE is a bit distorted, there are a lot of people baking ''bases'', then not icing, or a lot of people who arrived here all icing, no base.

What cannot be denied is that to ice a cake, you have to hve baked the base first. No harm in throwing some flavours into the batter before baking, but icing unbaked cake is a recipe for disaster.

the_ash_and_the_oak

PasturesNew wrote: »

When there is less demand, less are made. Less being made makes the unit price higher.

...true but the interesting thing w houses is that its not centred on new products, existing houses make up a large percentage of sales - often commanding higher prices than newbuilds

mr_fishbulb

It's not a competition. Why do there have to be winners and losers? It's just a bunch of people looking to own a house.

If you are happy with the price of houses, buy one and live in it.
If you think they are too expensive, decide if you want to gamble and wait.
If you think they are too cheap, buy two.

But don't go around calling people losers because of when they did or didn't buy their house. That just makes you a d!ck.

Edit - that wasn't a direct attack at you kriss_boy, just at the sort of mentality displayed by some on this board.

lostinrates

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

...true but the interesting thing w houses is that its not centred on new products, existing houses make up a large percentage of sales - often commanding higher prices than newbuilds

But it is fair to say that while the stock is still availbale for recirculation, there are demands both from more peole and longer lives, on housing stock.

the_ash_and_the_oak

lostinrates wrote: »

But it is fair to say that while the stock is still availbale for recirculation, there are demands both from more peole and longer lives, on housing stock.

While it is true that population has of course increased, the proportion of housing now owner occupied has also increased. and there has of course been the construction of new stock to add the recirculating existing stock.

The longer lives issue is an interesting one - what proportion of the extended life expentency do we think is spent in owner-occupancy and what proportion in residential care homes?

lostinrates

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

While it is true that population has of course increased, the proportion of housing now owner occupied has also increased. and there has of course been the construction of new stock to add the recirculating existing stock.

The longer lives issue is an interesting one - what proportion of the extended life expentency do we think is spent in owner-occupancy and what proportion in residential care homes?

For my grandfather, his whole life was in own home, my grandmother had five-ish years in care homes. My other grandparents there own homes too.

JonnyBravo

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

The longer lives issue is an interesting one - what proportion of the extended life expentency do we think is spent in owner-occupancy and what proportion in residential care homes?

I have no idea but I'd mostly echo what lir said.
All of my grandparents lived in their home til the end. Some had daily visits from home care, some didn't. This is much more likely to be the future than residential homes which are vastly more expensive. My parents have already said that when the time comes (thankfully still a long way off, touch wood) they want to do all they can to remain in their home. Same approach as my nan, bit of care from the state, some from family, some from charity, some from local GP etc etc

the_ash_and_the_oak

But if we're saying people are having longer lives then aren't we implicitly saying it is less likely that people will stay in their own homes for the duration?

Isn't it more likely that someone who lives 20+ years in retirement is going to spend some of that time in residential care than someone who lives 5 years into retirement?

lostinrates

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

But if we're saying people are having longer lives then aren't we implicitly saying it is less likely that people will stay in their own homes for the duration?

Isn't it more likely that someone who lives 20+ years in retirement is going to spend some of that time in residential care than someone who lives 5 years into retirement?

Not necessarily. My maternal grandmother was in her home and was nearly 100. My great, great uncle tried to teach me to dance...he was a 104 I think at the time, and it wasn't pretty, but he was in his home.

with my own parents they would like to void going in to a home, but it still might chnge roperty usage as their new ideal solution is to move in with us after we are settled. It might be with later buying of first home and people living longer we see yet another new-new norm of household in the UK. Boomeranging is inreasingl common we are told..why not expet hange at th other end of life too.