The real reason for the problem

abaxas

Spartacus_Mills wrote: »

Using 1990 is rather dishonest. It is hardly representative.

Please can you cite, as I have asked before, where you get these figures from.

Thanks

Also isnt this household income? Huge difference when there are 2 working than in the past 1, with maybe the other part time.

The_White_Horse

there was a generation of homebuyers that had no choice, for a decade, but to pay high prices - paying 300k for a house that should have been 100k 7 years earlier.

To suggets no one buy a property in a decade is just nonsense.

and what does this mean?:

QUOTE

we are a one wage couple, we brought our house 4 years ago, we have no money issues despite the fact that my wifes salary has just dropped 10k pa

UNQUOTE

are you saying you don't work and your wife is the bread winner, and her salary dropped 10K, but yet you are fine? that is good, she must be on a fortune.

most are not.

people need to start living in the real world. this current generation are paying far more (as a salary multiple) for their homes that their parents did. Most people in or around London admit that their own parents would not have been able to afford the home they live in if they had to buy over the last few years.

it is painfully obvious.

ILW

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

No, the percentage of dual income households has not changed all that dramatically between 1990 and now. The change between 1970 and 1990 was far bigger.

The average income of women, particularly professional women, has increased significantly in that time though.

Prostitutes?

Thrugelmir

ILW wrote: »

Prostitutes?

What happened to equal opportunities?