Are high house prices a good thing?

TDS_2

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I refer you to post 27 where I asked why an essential necessity in life should be valued as cheaply..

That isn't an answer to the OP, that's another question. An attempt, if you will, to defend high house prices (did you buy recently - i.e. close to peak?)

Please answer the question asked. Yes/No/Maybe will suffice; a paragraph of explanation would be even better.

My answer is no, btw.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Are high house prices a good thing? It's irrelevant.

They're inevitable unless you build a few million more houses, and do so faster than population grows. The chances of which seem very slim.

So those of us who will benefit from higher prices will continue to do so, in all probablility, for decades to come. And those who will not benefit from high prices should take all steps possible to change their situation to such that they will benefit from higher prices, instead of moaning about it on the internet.

abaxas

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So those of us who will benefit from higher prices will continue to do so, in all probablility, for decades to come.

LOL!

As we have seen, higher house prices suck money from the real economy in sitaution of low inflation. Also as they rise, owner occupation diminishes, which changes the politcal will from owner occupation (thatcher) to renting agenda (socialist).

If you beleive that houses will outstrip wages for years to come, all you are doing is ultimiatly devaluing your house. People will simply opt of of society, as they are doing in their millions now. Who exactly is going to pay for this, my guess is you.

Arthritic_Toe

How can the high price of anything be a good thing (apart from the people who make the thing or have invested in the thing)?

Rapidly increasing houseprices from 95-07 made lots of money for builders, developers and investors, but for everyone else it just means that they have to pay more to money buy the thing. Its just simple and obvious.

bernard_shaw

Arthritic_Toe wrote: »

How can the high price of anything be a good thing (apart from the people who make the thing or have invested in the thing)?

Those who suffer from status anxiety find that an increase in the market price of their holdings flatters them.

markharding557

Some sensible regulation of the housing market is needed,it is madness that housing is purchased as holiday homes and thus rendering them empty much of the time.
this should not be allowed in a crowded country which is short of housing

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

markharding557 wrote: »

Some sensible regulation of the housing market is needed,it is madness that housing is purchased as holiday homes and thus rendering them empty much of the time.
this should not be allowed in a crowded country which is short of housing

Da Comrade, this should not be "allowed", much better that housing be controlled by the state.

Holiday houses? A wasteful use of resources, unless of course it is for Dacha's for the good little party apparachniks......:rolleyes:

DaddyBear

markharding557 wrote: »

Some sensible regulation of the housing market is needed,it is madness that housing is purchased as holiday homes and thus rendering them empty much of the time.
this should not be allowed in a crowded country which is short of housing

What we need are changes to tax laws.
My philosophy would be to have 1st houses exempt from stamp duty to £250k and then 2% above that.
Any other home should have stamp duty applicable at a higher level, say 4%, irrespective of value. They should also have an annual tax placed upon them, say 1% of the value, and should not be eligible for reduction in council tax.
The aim is to make a first home almost free of tax, yet make subsequent purchases highly taxed. You only need one home so anyone with more than one deserves to be taxed highly.

IveSeenTheLight

TDS wrote: »

That isn't an answer to the OP, that's another question. An attempt, if you will, to defend high house prices (did you buy recently - i.e. close to peak?)

Please answer the question asked. Yes/No/Maybe will suffice; a paragraph of explanation would be even better.

My answer is no, btw.

To answer your question in bold, I have two properties in the UK.
One bought in 2004, another in Jan 2007.
You may consider that the one bought in January is "close to peak", however factually it is still up on average for the area by 16.87% from the time I bought three years ago.
I therefore have no concerns over NE as you may be thinking, especially when the LTV is approx 53%

http://www.ros.gov.uk/pdfs/la_oct_2009.pdf

http://www.ros.gov.uk/pdfs/la_jan07.pdf

The OP's question is largely irrelevant in my opinion, however as I have invested in property as part of a pension plan, it is in my interest for property prices to rise.

House prices are set by the market, one in which we now have the highest percentage of owner occupiers in recorded history.
House prices could have been a lot lower if credit was not so easily available, but then the outcome would be that there would be far less owner occupiers.
Which is preferential, to have the option to purchase at th
e given market price or to not have the option to purchase due to a lack of credit?

markharding557

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Da Comrade, this should not be "allowed", much better that housing be controlled by the state.

Holiday houses? A wasteful use of resources, unless of course it is for Dacha's for the good little party apparachniks......:rolleyes:

I take it then you are quite happy with our boom to bust housing market where anyone on anything like an average wage can't afford them,unless of course they are lent insane amonunts they can't afford by our wonderful bankers.
But wait where did that get the country??