Housing Affordability has peaked, now decreasing

Thrugelmir

Deleted_User wrote: »

Prices won't come down because if people can't buy they'll pay rent so that landlords can buy. Either way there is competition for property which pushes prices up.

As the economy rebalances renting will become more expensive than paying a mortgage. So for many types of property there won't be much interest as an investment.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Thrugelmir wrote: »

As the economy rebalances renting will become more expensive than paying a mortgage. So for many types of property there won't be much interest as an investment.

Renting is already more expensive than paying a mortgage in many areas.

Strangely, demand for property and property prices both seem to rise when that happens.

Hmmmm, I wonder why?

Oh thats right, because when the rent is more than the mortgage, investors flood into the market, and prices rise rather rapidly.:rolleyes:

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Deleted_User wrote: »

Now a question to those of you that want property prices to fall. Are any of you home owners?

Some of them claim to be.....

For those of you that are home owners how many of you are willing to sell your house at substantially less than people are willing to pay for it in order to give youngsters a chance? If you really are sincere then lead by example.

If they truly believed in their convictions, surely they would?

Seems only fair, given that they keep expecting us homeowners to buy more and more houses just cause we think prices are rising....;)

Graham_Devon

Deleted_User wrote: »

Now a question to those of you that want property prices to fall. Are any of you home owners?

For those of you that are home owners how many of you are willing to sell your house at substantially less than people are willing to pay for it in order to give youngsters a chance? If you really are sincere then lead by example.

Yes, home owner.

I would happily sell it at a lower value than I paid for it if that was the market value. I.e. if I had lost 20%, fair do's.

I wouldn't sell it at a discounted price well below the market value just to give someone a chance, simply because I need that money to buy another place.

You could of course turn the question and say to those wanting rises, would you pay substantially more than the price accepted by the seller to lead by example. I think the answer would always be no.

It's one of those completely irrelevant, pointless questions which can be asked by both sides.

Emy1501

Deleted_User wrote: »

I think the point is that people need to have a roof over their heads. Some will be lucky enough to have the cash to buy a house outright. The others have the choice of borrowing to buy their own home or paying rent to pay off someone elses mortgage. That's just the way it is. Prices won't come down because if people can't buy they'll pay rent so that landlords can buy. Either way there is competition for property which pushes prices up.

Now a question to those of you that want property prices to fall. Are any of you home owners?

For those of you that are home owners how many of you are willing to sell your house at substantially less than people are willing to pay for it in order to give youngsters a chance? If you really are sincere then lead by example.

I stand to inherit over 7 figures if HPI doubles in 15-20 years as Hamish guarantees. I'm happy to for go most of that if it gives my children and others a chance to buy.

Thrugelmir

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Hmmmm, I wonder why?

Oh thats right, because when the rent is more than the mortgage, investors flood into the market, and prices rise rather rapidly.:rolleyes:

Many amateur landlords appear unaware that their rental income is taxable and the capital element of the mortgage is repaid from after tax income.

For those recent investors, highly leveraged, stuck on their interest only mortgages, exposed to the gathering interest rate winds. No equity to remortgage with. Not a comfortable investment stance.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Emy1501 wrote: »

I stand to inherit over 7 figures if HPI doubles in 15-20 years as Hamish guarantees. I'm happy to for go most of that if it gives my children and others a chance to buy.

But by inheriting that, you could also use it to help your children buy.

The property ladder is no such thing.... It's more like a ferris wheel, and the wealth contained in it constantly recirculates.

nearlynew

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

But by inheriting that, you could also use it to help your children buy.

The property ladder is no such thing.... It's more like a ferris wheel, and the wealth contained in it constantly recirculates.

I've got a better idea...

Why doesn't the governent just give everyone in the country £1million ?

That way we would all be millionaires and all our money problems will be solved.

[Deleted User]

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Yes, home owner.

I would happily sell it at a lower value than I paid for it if that was the market value. I.e. if I had lost 20%, fair do's.

Sure, I'm sure we'd all just grin and bear it if that was all we were offered.

I wouldn't sell it at a discounted price well below the market value just to give someone a chance, simply because I need that money to buy another place.

And I'm sure most people would think likewise.

But what if your house was valued at £100k and you got offered say, £100k by a young family on modest income and offered 200k by someone older with lots of disposable income that just had their heart set on our house. Would you have the courage of your convictions?

I can honestly say I'd take the £200k and that would be entirely in keeping with my view on the matter of house prices.

You could of course turn the question and say to those wanting rises, would you pay substantially more than the price accepted by the seller to lead by example. I think the answer would always be no.

Absolutely no!!! But I've not heard anyone that wants house prices to rise try to pretend it's out of concern for the youngsters. We want house prices to rise so that we make more money. It's no different from wanting interest rates low when your debts are greater than your savings and interest rates high when your savings are greater than your debts. Anyone that's bought or inheritted shares surely wants the price to go up rather than down?

It's one of those completely irrelevant, pointless questions which can be asked by both sides.

I don't think it's an irrelevant, pointless question. It's a question that highlights the fact that we're all really on the same side - looking after our own interests! Some of us are at a stage in life where house prices going up would benefit us. Others are at a stage in life where house prices going down would benefit us. Whatever happens some people will gain and some will loose out. Some are trying to take the moral high ground and fool us into thinking that they aren't out for themselves but simply concerned about the youngsters. I don't buy it - sorry.

What I will say is that if you really do what to help others then the more money you have the better able you are to do it. Just by being in a position to spend right now you're helping a lot.

Emy1501, surely if you had an inheritence in 7 figures you'd be able to help your kids and lots of other people to buy. Whereas if you sold it of cheap (because of your convictions) who would you help? I don't think your kids would thank you. All you'd do is let one lucky sod make a huge profit at their expense.

And what about when it came to selling YOUR house? Would you sell it at valuation price? more if you could get it? Or would you have the courage of your convictions and sell it at a much lower price that you think youngsters can afford?

bernard_shaw

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

But by inheriting that, you could also use it to help your children buy.

The property ladder is no such thing.... It's more like a ferris wheel, and the wealth contained in it constantly recirculates.

Hail the new Feudalism!