Darling admits house prices are too high

Graham_Devon

And suggests to keep them rising we need to exclude certain people from paying stamp duty.

"If it aint broke, don't attempt fix it", says Graham.

If it's broke, fiddle and bodge constantly until you can't possibly fix it anymore, says Darling, who denies that it's broke, but feels the need to meddle constantly to keep it floating.

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

And suggests to keep them rising we need to exclude certain people from paying stamp duty.

"If it aint broke, don't attempt fix it", says Graham.

If it's broke, fiddle and bodge constantly until you can't possibly fix it anymore, says Darling, who denies that it's broke, but feels the need to meddle constantly to keep it floating.

Never mind GD next year it will be permanent.

The_White_Horse

if house prices are allowed to fall - as they should. the govt needs to protect people who bought between 2000 and 2007 who may be crippled with massive debts for the rest of their lives due to the govts incompetence and encouragement of a debt based economy.

Its all very well for a 200k house to fall to 100k, but what of those with a 180k mortgage, they are ruined for many years, especially if interest rates rise. a technique needs to be devised to help the victims of the govt's gross negligence. and that is EVERY person who bought from 2000 onwards. maybe rates on mortgages taken out during this period can never go above 2%.

twadge_face

Graham_Devon wrote: »

And suggests to keep them rising we need to exclude certain people from paying stamp duty.

Do you mean to keep them FROM rising?

Do we have a record of Alistair Darling saying this? I suppose there is Hansard but doubt it has been updated yet.

Really2

TBF it has generated a bit of interest. The buying and selling board is having a boom again. (410 users,and this one 50+:))
Most probably down to clarification of the changes.

Emy1501

At least we will now find out how many genuine FTB's there are now. An EA on the BBC said earlier that only 1% of his sales last year were to FTBs

Really2

Emy1501 wrote: »

At least we will now find out how many genuine FTB's there are now. An EA on the BBC said earlier that only 1% of his sales last year were to FTBs

Is that genuine as per the stamp duty offer or genuine as in terms of being out of the market more than 6 months? ( I would say any one who had not purchased before was genuine but it only takes one person in a couple to have owned to make them non FTB according to the government)

How could you have 1% FTB? Did he live in Downsize-Upsizevill?

Running_Horse

The_White_Horse wrote: »

if house prices are allowed to fall - as they should. the govt needs to protect people who bought between 2000 and 2007 who may be crippled with massive debts for the rest of their lives due to the govts incompetence and encouragement of a debt based economy.

Its all very well for a 200k house to fall to 100k, but what of those with a 180k mortgage, they are ruined for many years, especially if interest rates rise. a technique needs to be devised to help the victims of the govt's gross negligence. and that is EVERY person who bought from 2000 onwards. maybe rates on mortgages taken out during this period can never go above 2%.

The government does not need to protect anyone who made an adult financial decision.

I had negative equity in the 90s, and took full responsibility for my own actions.

The best thing Gordon the Moron can do for the housing market is stop meddling.

stealeruk

"if house prices are allowed to fall - as they should. the govt needs to protect people who bought between 2000 and 2007 who may be crippled with massive debts for the rest of their lives due to the govts incompetence and encouragement of a debt based economy."

The value of any investment can go down as well as up, that's life. No one made them buy. There really cant be that many FTB's that are going to benefit from this. If you've ever had your name on deeds to a property you're not a first time buyer.

Emy1501

Really2 wrote: »

Is that genuine as per the stamp duty offer or genuine as in terms of being out of the market more than 6 months? ( I would say any one who had not purchased before was genuine but it only takes one person in a couple to have owned to make them non FTB according to the government)

How could you have 1% FTB? Did he live in Downsize-Upsizevill?

Actually he was just on BBC said it was actually 0.1% of his registered applicants. Do not know exactly what he mans as a FTB

dopester

The_White_Horse wrote: »

if house prices are allowed to fall - as they should. the govt needs to protect people who bought between 2000 and 2007 who may be crippled with massive debts for the rest of their lives due to the govts incompetence and encouragement of a debt based economy.

Its all very well for a 200k house to fall to 100k, but what of those with a 180k mortgage, they are ruined for many years, especially if interest rates rise. a technique needs to be devised to help the victims of the govt's gross negligence. and that is EVERY person who bought from 2000 onwards. maybe rates on mortgages taken out during this period can never go above 2%.

That is the whackiest thing you've ever posted. Individual responsibility. I'm getting no extra funds for having patiently waited before buying a home - because I could not accept previous prices as reflecting any level of value or sustainability whatsoever.

Those who chose to buy at whatever price they transacted at have to accept whatever losses or drops in value are coming their way. No; to filthy bail outs. If it takes financial pain to educate people that house prices don't magically double every 7 years.. they have to accept the drops in value without protection (more money from me and other taxpayers + future taxpayers).