The ticking time bomb ready to obliterate the house price revival

the_ash_and_the_oak

they're not socialists imo.

kinda feeling socialists are more into narrowing the gap between rich and poor not widening it and also pretty sure socialists are into full employment rather than increasing unemployment and creating benefits culture tbh

the_ash_and_the_oak

also kinda feeling if Labour hate property so much why so much encouragement for people to buy it

LydiaJ

ceridwen wrote: »

But then...one thing that isnt taken into account here is that some of us KNOW we definitely wont ever be going into care homes ever/full stop/no matter what - as we have already decided that, whatever happens, we will stay put in our own homes.

I havent worked this hard for my pile of bricks and mortar to have anyone steal it off me ever for something I myself wont ever need.

I would honestly rather stay put here till to the bitter end - even if it was "bitter" and I ended up in a heap at the bottom of my stairs having fallen down them. I think my "quality of life" would be better overall that way than a potential however many months/years of trying to lead a reasonable life in an old peoples home.

So - yes - I wont need it...so why should my money be stolen to pay for it?

But there are lots of old people who feel like this and end up in care homes anyway.

Suppose your hypothetical fall down the stairs doesn't kill you but just breaks your hip. What are you going to do when you are discharged from hospital unable to walk? What if you have a stroke? Where will you live when you are discharged from hospital unable to speak and with most of the left side of your body not able to move? What if you get Alzheimer's and become a danger to yourself if you live alone because you might leave the gas on or start wandering down the street in your pyjamas at 2am? What if you get Parkinson's and can't make your fingers turn the key in the front door to get into your house, let alone look after yourself once you're inside? What if you become almost completely blind and deaf and can't find your way anywhere or communicate properly with anyone?

These are real things that have happened to real old people that I know. Sometimes soldiering on to the bitter end just doesn't work out, despite people's strongest intentions.

ses6jwg

If you think New Labour are socialists you really don't have a clue.

treliac

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

We managed to hit the recessions in the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's (when the bottom fell out of the housing market in the south east) and this one - yes, we have been lucky, life has been a bed of roses and everything was handed to us on a plate.

Some of these young and frustrated would be purchasers do think that, it seems.

As you say, baileys..... many of us who've been in the property market for the past couple of decades or so have had a huge struggle. Nothing was handed to us or made easy. We didn't have the expectations of material possessions that lots of the younger generation now have. If we needed furniture, home improvements, or other things that can be taken for granted these days, we had to save or go without.

We are not to blame for the irresponsible lending of more recent years that has led to the current market. I for one worked hard and did without in order to keep everything together and pay my way. We struggled to overcome a mis-sold pension mortgage and had to cope with sky high interest rates and two periods of redundancy during earlier recessions. I am certainly not going to bear the blame for the profligacy of the past few years, which has led to today's problems.

Of course there are middle-aged people who are comfortably off. There are also those who are definitely not. And there are young people who are successful and doing well. It's down to many, many factors not just when you happen to have been born.

These chips on the shoulders of some are only likely to weigh you down. You'd do best to get on with life, its ups and downs, and try to work it out as best you can. Just like we've all had to.

BritRael

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Many olds have mutually contradictory desires for their kids to get on the property ladder, whilst at the same time wanting to sell their boomer boxes to other peoples kids for 10 times what they paid for them, to fund a nice retirement. ...

Thats called 'current market value' my friend.

Or are you telling us that if you wanted to sell a property worth 200,000 today, that you would sell it for 20,000 because thats what you paid for it?? :rolleyes:

Also, whats so wrong about wanting to 'fund a nice retirement'? Personally, I have always saved, and have accumlated a fair nest egg. It was my choice to not get into rampant consumerism and certainly to not buy anything if I couldn't afford it. A strange concept for some I know.

ThrowingStonesAtYou

BritRael wrote: »

Thats called 'current market value' my friend.

Or are you telling us that if you wanted to sell a property worth 200,000 today, that you would sell it for 20,000 because thats what you paid for it?? :rolleyes:

I don't think he was disputing the current market value, what he said was purely factual.

BritRael wrote: »

Also, whats so wrong about wanting to 'fund a nice retirement'? Personally, I have always saved, and have accumlated a fair nest egg. It was my choice to not get into rampant consumerism and certainly to not buy anything if I couldn't afford it. A strange concept for some I know.

There's nothing wrong with funding a nice retirement, however hoping to do so at the expense of your children via huge unearned property gains is not good for society. Are you telling me you've never noticed boomers dribbling into their M+S turkey dinners at the prospect of all that lovely free cash when there's another announcement of large HPI on the news?

BritRael

ThrowingStonesAtYou wrote: »

I don't think he was disputing the current market value, what he said was purely factual....

What he was doing was making a sweeping 'sour grapes' statement.

I don't hear anybody whining when they actually have made 'ten times' the value on something, and I don't think this person would either. Do you?

ThrowingStonesAtYou wrote: »

...There's nothing wrong with funding a nice retirement, however hoping to do so at the expense of your children via huge unearned property gains is not good for society....

What do you mean 'unearned gains'?

People make a decision to buy a home. Hopefully, after years of struggling to pay for it, it's worth more than they have spent on it. What's your problem?

Personally, I bought my first home many years ago for 18k. Ok, not a lot in todays money, but a lot then. I scrimped and saved to get a deposit for the mortgage (which was around 15% btw). I remember calculating at the time that the repayments would have meant me paying around 84k for it over the term.
Anyway, lots of people I knew, lived in rented accommodation, didn't save, and generally pi**ed their money up a wall etc. Do you think that I should now somehow feel guilty that I am going to make a profit on my decision and they are still in rented accommodation because of theirs?

ThrowingStonesAtYou wrote: »

...Are you telling me you've never noticed boomers dribbling into their M+S turkey dinners at the prospect of all that lovely free cash when there's another announcement of large HPI on the news?

lol - no, never

Again, personally, I take no notice of HPI. My home is just that, my home. After 25 years of scrimping, I have paid off the mortgage so I now live pretty cheaply. But it took a lot of hard work and determination to achieve this position. I suppose, at some stage my relatives are going to spend 'all that lovely free cash'. But me? Nah, I live in it. :rolleyes: