Second Home Ownership reaches Record Level

DervProf

BritRael wrote: »

Originally Posted by Dan:
Fairness has nothing to do with it. If you have the money you can buy what you like.



1. Get real. You cannot equate the legal activity of buying a product with the illegal activity of buying guns and drugs.

2. To complain about people 'buying up properties' is like complaining about rich people buying up champagne and smoked salmon while the rest of us can only afford pepsi and burgers.

3. What's 'fairness' got to do with buying something? If you were to put your property up for sale would you refuse to sell it to somebody who owns another property?? No, I didn't think so.

1. I didn`t. Dan stated that if you have money, you can buy whatever you like. I simply questioned his statement by pointing out that sometimes money can buy things that can do harm.

2. No it isn`t. I, and many other can happily live without champagne and smoked salmon. Living without a roof over my head is a less pleasant prospect. If there were a shortage of champagne, and wealthy speculators bought up large supplies of the stuff, I wouldn`t really be too bothered, as wouldn`t the majority of the population. I think it is, or would be fair to complain about people buying up supplies of a limited resource that is a quite essential need for almost everyone.

3. I`d say "a lot", if it is an almost essential requirement for most people. I`d say that if there was a food shortage, it would be fair to ration it. Others might argue that it should be survival of the richest/fittest, but I don`t think like that. Your very last point raises an interesting scenario, and I can honestly say that I would have to think very long and hard before selling it to someone who was buying purely to invest.

BritRael

Originally Posted by BritRael
Originally Posted by Dan:
Fairness has nothing to do with it. If you have the money you can buy what you like.



1. Get real. You cannot equate the legal activity of buying a product with the illegal activity of buying guns and drugs.

2. To complain about people 'buying up properties' is like complaining about rich people buying up champagne and smoked salmon while the rest of us can only afford pepsi and burgers.

3. What's 'fairness' got to do with buying something? If you were to put your property up for sale would you refuse to sell it to somebody who owns another property?? No, I didn't think so.

DervProf wrote: »

1. I didn`t. Dan stated that if you have money, you can buy whatever you like. I simply questioned his statement by pointing out that sometimes money can buy things that can do harm.

True.

DervProf wrote: »

2. No it isn`t. I, and many other can happily live without champagne and smoked salmon. Living without a roof over my head is a less pleasant prospect. If there were a shortage of champagne, ....

That's my whole point; nobody has to 'live without a roof over their head'. If you cannot afford to buy, you rent. There is no shortage of rental properties.
When I was a kid, the vast majority of the country rented. Nowadays, many think that they 'have a right' to house ownership when they do not have the resources.

DervProf wrote: »

3. ...Your very last point raises an interesting scenario, and I can honestly say that I would have to think very long and hard before selling it to someone who was buying purely to invest.

Again, that's my point; you'd 'think very long and hard'....before accepting. Which of course, you have every right to do. Thats called a 'free market'.

Don't get me wrong, I can see where you're coming from and from a moral viewpoint I can empathise. For example, I could understand the Welsh 'come home to a real fire' campaign waged a few years back, and I've also seen first-hand the damage done to my local communities when loads of properties are bought up by wealthy 'outsiders'. I just don't agree that legislation is the way to go.

I would like to buy a country mansion that is for sale in my area, but I can't. Who do I blame:
- Rich 'toffs' for buying them all up and artificially raising the cost?
- The banks for not lending me the 15 million required to buy it?
- Myself, for not having the money?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

PasturesNew wrote: »

People just need to stop breeding and we need to stop importing workers. Get the UK population down to about 40 million productive people.

10 years ago there were 5 workers for every 1 pensioner.

Today there are 4 workers for every 1 pensioner.

In 30 years there will be just 2 workers for every 1 pensioner, and that's IF we keep population growing and immigration as high as it is today.

If you "stop breeding" and end "importing workers" to get population down to 40 million, the ratio would look more like 1 worker for every 3 pensioners.

At which point you're looking at tax rates approaching 90% just to keep the crusties alive.....

So which do you choose...... 90% taxes? Or forced Euthanasia of your parents generation? (and then your own generation as you age, etc)

kabayiri

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

10 years ago there were 5 workers for every 1 pensioner.

Today there are 4 workers for every 1 pensioner.

In 30 years there will be just 2 workers for every 1 pensioner, and that's IF we keep population growing and immigration as high as it is today.

If you "stop breeding" and end "importing workers" to get population down to 40 million, the ratio would look more like 1 worker for every 3 pensioners.

At which point you're looking at tax rates approaching 90% just to keep the crusties alive.....

So which do you choose...... 90% taxes? Or forced Euthanasia of your parents generation? (and then your own generation as you age, etc)

If this were the only way to go, then why is Germany's population set to decline in coming years, not increase.

Are they missing a trick? Are we much brighter?
Of course not, they have better growth figures than we do, and a more diversified economy.

Perhaps they don't buy into a population Ponzi scheme to deal with retirement; because it's destined to fail at some point.

We need to up the quality of the immigrants we bring in, not the quantity. If we were able to attract 100 of the very best ecommerce specialists, they would be worth far more than 10,000 hard working cleaners and fruit pickers.

You just support the idea of an ever greater number of people chasing a limited supply of properties.....wonder why?
Oh yes! Coz you're the great property ramper.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

kabayiri wrote: »

If this were the only way to go, then why is Germany's population set to decline in coming years, not increase.

Are they missing a trick? Are we much brighter?
Of course not, they have better growth figures than we do, and a more diversified economy.

Perhaps they don't buy into a population Ponzi scheme to deal with retirement; because it's destined to fail at some point.

We need to up the quality of the immigrants we bring in, not the quantity. If we were able to attract 100 of the very best ecommerce specialists, they would be worth far more than 10,000 hard working cleaners and fruit pickers.

You have spectacularly failed to get it.

Other countries are of no relevance to the UK's position.... Perhaps their demographics are different, perhaps their pension funds are in better shape, perhaps their governments of the last few decades have not spent all the pension contributions of the last 3 generations of workers, leaving a massive unfunded liability for the current generation.

In order to bring forward the pension and care burden by 3 generations, for people to pay for their own retirements moving forwards rather than the retirements of the current pensioners, you would need to raise taxes by an absolutely massive amount.

And that is if the ratio of pensioners to workers remains the same as is currently projected with population growth.

If it falls below 1:1, which would inevitably happen if population shrank, then forget about buying houses. You'll be lucky to have enough money left after your 90% taxes to eat.

You just support the idea of an ever greater number of people chasing a limited supply of properties.....wonder why?
Oh yes! Coz you're the great property ramper.

And you just support anything, no matter how stupid the idea or how much more it will cost you, that may bring house prices down.

A classic case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Procrastinator333

No two ways about it, paying the pensions of the oldies is a BIG problem for the younger generations.

Personally I think the retirement age should be ramped up. That will hit me when I'm older too. But we live so much longer, we should work longer.

Maybe even have something like nothing until you are 70, then a half pension until you are 80. The idea being you can do a part time or reduced level of work and then a full pension at 80.

Then link it to average life expectancy.

And the retirement age for women should be equalised with men today. They live longer, should work for longer. Wimps.

I don't think immigration is the only solution and I'm also not sure people are going to want to come to the UK. The net migration report is due out in August, so should be out in a few days. Will be interesting to see if the A8 countries continue to leave.

kabayiri

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

No two ways about it, paying the pensions of the oldies is a BIG problem for the younger generations.

It's big enough to need more innovative solutions, not just blunt population increase.

We need to look at the cost of living for pensioners. If they can live cheap, efficient, healthy lives on less money; the net cost goes down.

There will be pensioners today, who have seen their council tax bills double over the last decade. As a pensioner, your ability to generate additional income is often restricted, and sharp increases in the cost of living can cause considerable worry.

My grandparents had no car; didn't own a house (or 3 as in Hamish's case); had no real fancy luxuries to speak of. Where they happy? You bet ya. As long as they got to see grandchildren/children, had food on the table, could catch the bus to the shops they were happy.

It's time to look again at what we expect from life. The answer is not a new plasma telly every year.

Hamish won't get it because it doesn't involve buying houses.

Generali

People will have to work longer.

When the age pension was introduced, the average person that collected it did so for 18 months. Now a 65y/o man is expected to live another 17 years, a woman 20 years.

State pension ages are going to have to be increased dramatically. People doing manual work will have to do something else for the last 10 or 20 years of their careers. Some people will have to work until they drop pretty much. The alternative will be that people accept much lower living standards in order to save enough to pay for their retirement.

Procrastinator333

kabayiri wrote: »

It's big enough to need more innovative solutions, not just blunt population increase.

We need to look at the cost of living for pensioners. If they can live cheap, efficient, healthy lives on less money; the net cost goes down.

There will be pensioners today, who have seen their council tax bills double over the last decade. As a pensioner, your ability to generate additional income is often restricted, and sharp increases in the cost of living can cause considerable worry.

My grandparents had no car; didn't own a house (or 3 as in Hamish's case); had no real fancy luxuries to speak of. Where they happy? You bet ya. As long as they got to see grandchildren/children, had food on the table, could catch the bus to the shops they were happy.

It's time to look again at what we expect from life. The answer is not a new plasma telly every year.

Hamish won't get it because it doesn't involve buying houses.

Hang on. So let me see if I follow.

You quote 1 line out of my post and then start talking about population increases not being enough? I said further down I'm skeptical people are still going to want to come to the UK.

You then say it is going to need innovative solutions. Well great, any suggestions?


Then you post, and if I'm reading it correctly - saying we need to think about how much pensioners need and that the answer is not a plasma telly every year? I'm guessing you are not refering to pensioners as I don't think they are the plasma telly buyers.

So are you saying I should be giving up even more to pay for their pension?

Everyone seems to get grumpy with Hamish and dismiss his point. But it is a fact, there is a demographic shift that is going to completely screw over my generation unless something is done.

And I think that something is a drastically increased pension age, well, state pension anywya. If I save up enough I want to be retiring early.

Generali

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

Hang on. So let me see if I follow.

You quote 1 line out of my post and then start talking about population increases not being enough? I said further down I'm skeptical people are still going to want to come to the UK.

You then say it is going to need innovative solutions. Well great, any suggestions?


Then you post, and if I'm reading it correctly - saying we need to think about how much pensioners need and that the answer is not a plasma telly every year? I'm guessing you are not refering to pensioners as I don't think they are the plasma telly buyers.

So are you saying I should be giving up even more to pay for their pension?

Everyone seems to get grumpy with Hamish and dismiss his point. But it is a fact, there is a demographic shift that is going to completely screw over my generation unless something is done.

And I think that something is a drastically increased pension age, well, state pension anywya. If I save up enough I want to be retiring early.

No innovative solutions are required. The choices are the same as ever with retirement.

1. Spend less and save more during the working life to fund a long retirement.
2. Spend the same and work longer to finance a 'bigger' lifestyle
or
3. Spend the same and accept penury in a long retirement

Clearly, the older you are, the less able you will be to pick option 1. Older Civil Servants may well find themselves in a very nasty place as retirement benefits are cut back with little time for them to make good.