Are high house prices a good thing?

Emy1501

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Please look up the facts for the amount the government scheme has saved.
I think you'll be surprised with the actual figures.

You rightly state that the CML have reduced their projection from 75,000 to 45,000. So that could be seen as 30,000, but this is not solely from the government scheme to stop reposessions, much of this will be down to lower interest rates.

If you saw any of the PBR today you would have heard Mr Darling actually increase the figure from 200K to 240K which suggests to me that we are talking about 20K a month who he is suggesting would have either been repossessed or been forced sellers if it was not for government measures.

ILW

Emy1501 wrote: »

We are not talking about government schemes etc. Clearly low interests, QE etc have had an effect. Also the CML were forcasting about 105K repossesssions next year now its about 55K.

The figures are not from me they came from GB's mouth himself and as noone has argued the fact from what I can see we have to take it that without these really low interest rates, QE, forcing banks not to repossess etc up to 200K people who would have had to sell have been kept in a home.

That means 200k people would have bought the houses (repos dont seem to stay empty for long) so no net gain or loss, just different people.

TDS_2

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Hi carol, I've raised some alternative views to your points

Yes you have. What you've failed to do, however, is answer the OP's question.

I get the impression from you responses, that you are pleased that house prices are high?

Emy1501

ILW wrote: »

That means 200k people would have bought the houses (repos dont seem to stay empty for long) so no net gain or loss, just different people.[/QUOTE

Do you honestly expect people to believe that 200K forced sales onto the market would have had no effect on price?

Cannon_Fodder

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

A roof over your head is arguable one of the most important things required in life along with food and water.
Why shouldn't these be financially valued as such?

Erm...its very importance is a reason to control the price effectively. Runaway prices do not help people have "one of the most important things in life".

How do you control it?

- Millions more 'council/social' houses could provide the bottom 30% of incomes with a roof, take the heat out of the buying market etc...

- limited second/multiple property ownership, so properties were not left unused, could free up some stock.

- many more tax/schemes/quangoes/options etc I am sure.


I would suggest the examples you used, food and water, are precisely the wrong ones to back up your argument. They are necessities. Not assets.

Food - despite recent food inflation, the superstores still compete to keep prices as keen as they can. (so 'the stores' say, some cynics won't agree, but trying to keep it simple) It may not be directly regulated, but there are subsidies/schemes etc to try to stablise prices.

It is illegal to deny water to people who fall into arrears. It is regulated to ensure the price is stable.

You say houses fall into the same set of "essentials". I agree. Why would high prices of food and water be a good thing??

Graham_Devon

ISTL will never say high house prices are a good thing.

What will happen is they will explain why houses should, or can, be higher priced. Ask them why it's good, and they do not appear.

They will say over and over some people will never be able to afford a property, which is undoubtedly true. But it never actually answers the question of WHY house prices being high is good, either for the generations, or for the economy.

It's good for them personally, that is all.

loueyn

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

A roof over your head is arguable one of the most important things required in life along with food and water.
Why shouldn't these be financially valued as such?

By the same token could you not argue that access to safe and secure housing is one of the most basic human rights and should be available to everyone? You could argue that high prices (along with a lack of community housing and affordable rental) mean that a large proportion of society are not getting their basic human rights.

I don't think high prices can ever be a good thing. If they keep rising back to their 2008 levels we'll be in exactly the same position of needing to borrow huge multiples and being a slave to debt just to get a foot on the ladder. It shocks me that we seem to have learned nothing from all of this.

ILW

Emy1501 wrote: »

ILW wrote: »

That means 200k people would have bought the houses (repos dont seem to stay empty for long) so no net gain or loss, just different people.[/QUOTE

Do you honestly expect people to believe that 200K forced sales onto the market would have had no effect on price?

I am sure it would, but in the end the same number of houses would be occupied so no change in home ownership, just a lower cost for some.

chucky

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

Erm...its very importance is a reason to control the price effectively. Runaway prices do not help people have "one of the most important things in life".

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What will happen is they will explain why houses should, or can, be higher priced. Ask them why it's good, and they do not appear

lol - the last couple of posts did make me smile. especially the bit claiming "Ask them why it's good, and they do not appear". the answer was gold - most people will say that high prices of anything are not good, unless you actually own them and they have a value. maybe they're unable to read those posts.

house prices go up, house prices go down - the demand and desire in the market sets the price of houses.
if house prices were so unaffordable why do so many people own their own property? it was rhetorical question - i know the answer thanks

the_ash_and_the_oak

loueyn wrote: »

By the same token could you not argue that access to safe and secure housing is one of the most basic human rights and should be available to everyone? You could argue that high prices (along with a lack of community housing and affordable rental) mean that a large proportion of society are not getting their basic human rights.

I don't own the house I live in but not really feeling my basic rights are missing in any way imo