Parents want a house price FALL to help their children get on the property ladder

silvercar

satchmeister wrote: »

Still don't understand why one has to survive on benefits and one doesn't? please explain.

One has money in the bank that they can use to live off and one has no cash they can access. Benefits are there to help those in need, if you have £200k in the bank you can look after yourself and don't have to survive on handouts from the state/ taxpayer.

satchmeister

silvercar wrote: »

One has money in the bank that they can use to live off and one has no cash they can access. Benefits are there to help those in need, if you have £200k in the bank you can look after yourself and don't have to survive on handouts from the state/ taxpayer.

So get rid of cash, buy a house with as big a mortgage as possible and if you have no money or lose your job the state will bail you out. Live within your means save and you get nothing.

No wonder the country is in the state it is. Is there any check that people who need this support lied about their income when getting the mortgage? what about the 125% mortgages? No just claim the 6.08% there are no exclusions they don't even check what your actual interest rate is.

silvercar

satchmeister wrote: »

So get rid of cash, buy a house with as big a mortgage as possible and if you have no money or lose your job the state will bail you out. Live within your means save and you get nothing.

No wonder the country is in the state it is. Is there any check that people who need this support lied about their income when getting the mortgage? what about the 125% mortgages? No just claim the 6.08% there are no exclusions they don't even check what your actual interest rate is.

Correct, though the 6.08% is dropping to 3.xx soon.

satchmeister

MadnessOfHPC wrote: »

If I interviewed 1000 set of parents and only 1 couple said they thought house prices should fall to help their children onto the ladder then you could STILL produce a thread title like 'Parents want a house price fall to help their children'. However, knowing the OP and their secret agenda I believe this thread and its title disingenuous and misleading to other posters. I therefore table that this thread be locked down.

It's irrelevant as house prices never fall and the government won't let prices fall.

The problem at the moment is that sellers are reducing their prices (no idea why) when all that needs to happen to get the market moving is bigger mortgages with high multiples of salary. Northern Rock knew how to get house prices increasing. Then parents could also re-mortgage their houses to fund their kids deposits. Job done.

wherediditallgothen

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I see you left out the important details, as always.

[/SIZE]


So presumably Two Thirds are hoping they rise.:cool:

It doesn't expressly say that. as it's the Daily Hate, the other 2/3 probably wanted immigrants shot at dawn. :cool:

Sapphire

Really2 wrote: »

Being a good parent is looking after you r child now and sorting out their future as much as possible.
It is also advisable to make sure your children have a good nest egg for when they are an adult.
Wanting prices is not enough, people need to prepare their children more also. If prices don't fall back at least if you have arrange for your child to have options by saving / investing for their future.

Are you saying parents should provide their kids with a nest egg, or that they should instruct their kids on how to accumulate their own nest egg? What do you mean by saying that 'you have to arrange for your child to have options by saving/investing for their future'? Do you mean that the parents should do this?

You see, that's what's wrong with people today. They expect everything to be handed to them on a platter.

For your information, neither I nor any of my three siblings have ever received anything in the way of a 'nest egg' from our parents, and we would never dream of expecting such a thing. What we have has been accumulated through our own hard work.

It's up to people to create their own 'nest eggs', not expect one to be handed to them for free. Parents' job is to raise kids with the right sort of values to benefit society, and provide for them when they are just kids and cannot fend for themselves.

silvercar

Sapphire wrote: »

Are you saying parents should provide their kids with a nest egg, or that they should instruct their kids on how to accumulate their own nest egg? What do you mean by saying that 'you have to arrange for your child to have options by saving/investing for their future'? Do you mean that the parents should do this?

You see, that's what's wrong with people today. They expect everything to be handed to them on a platter.

For your information, neither I nor any of my three siblings have ever received anything in the way of a 'nest egg' from our parents, and we would never dream of expecting such a thing. What we have has been accumulated through our own hard work.

It's up to people to create their own 'nest eggs', not expect one to be handed to them for free. Parents' job is to raise kids with the right sort of values to benefit society, and provide for them when they are just kids and cannot fend for themselves.

In an ideal world I agree. According to recent press articles a large percentage of FTB have help from family in finding the deposit for their homes. So you may not expect it from your parents, you may not give it to your children, but many families are providing their young with enough money for a deposit on their first home.

Really2

Sapphire wrote: »

Are you saying parents should provide their kids with a nest egg, or that they should instruct their kids on how to accumulate their own nest egg? What do you mean by saying that 'you have to arrange for your child to have options by saving/investing for their future'? Do you mean that the parents should do this?

You see, that's what's wrong with people today. They expect everything to be handed to them on a platter.

I would rather provide my child with the money to get through university rather than them get in debt.
It is not like they can earn the money before.

What is wrong with teaching children to save and prepare for the future.
What is wrong is that people do not do that.
people in the old days saved up things for when their kids got married.
What is wrong with old fashion values and prudence.

It's a jungle out there leaving it to chance when you have the ability to help is madness.

It is about making them stand on their own two feet sooner, not later.

silvercar

Really2 wrote: »

I would rather provide my child with the money to get through university rather than them get in debt.
It is not like they can earn the money before.

If you clear their university debt, they start adult life with no money and no debt.

If you give them the £20k (average for 3 yr course) for a deposit on a home, they can pay off their debt through the tax system at extremely low interest rate and never have to make payments when not earning sufficiently. At the same time they buy a home earlier and can get a lower interest rate thanks to the deposit you have provided.

My intention was to pay off the kids' student loan, on the grounds that I went through uni without acquiring debt and so should my kids if I can afford it. Then the above was explained to me and I can see the benefit.

Percy1983

What you miss is in many respects many of us 1980 onwards children can only afford a home with inheritance being part of the picture... the boomers chould afford housing without this help in most cases.