We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Mortgage lenders call for restrictions on lending to be watered down.
Comments
-
one good reason for keeping housing costs to a minimum (mortgage expenditure to income in particular) is this frees up a whole load more disposable income to be injected into the economy. if you have a population totally indebted to mortgage repayment for most of their lives that's not going to leave much extra dosh for retailers etc.Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. - Lord Byron0
-
You don't understand, houses are the economy :rotfl:. Selling piles of bricks to each other at higher and higher prices is what the UK does. The banking sector was rescued so we could continue doing this. QE is there to keep mortgage rates low. In the meantime we can export manufacturing jobs abroad and outsource services.one good reason for keeping housing costs to a minimum (mortgage expenditure to income in particular) is this frees up a whole load more disposable income to be injected into the economy. if you have a population totally indebted to mortgage repayment for most of their lives that's not going to leave much extra dosh for retailers etc.
Look how good things were when there were 125% mortgages at 6x salaries, now all we have is doom and gloom. At least under Gordon there were plenty of public sector jobs and rising house prices.0 -
What requirement for a 25% deposit? There are 90% mortgages out there.Loughton_Monkey wrote: »The requirement for 25% deposit,
Personally I think the standard 10% is rather low and that people should save 15%, preferably 20%. It leaves you with a smaller mortgage and in a better financial position.0 -
LittleMissAspie wrote: »What requirement for a 25% deposit? There are 90% mortgages out there.
Personally I think the standard 10% is rather low and that people should save 15%, preferably 20%. It leaves you with a smaller mortgage and in a better financial position.
Why not just let people make up their own minds, instead of trying to control their every move?0 -
LittleMissAspie wrote: »What requirement for a 25% deposit? There are 90% mortgages out there.
Personally I think the standard 10% is rather low and that people should save 15%, preferably 20%. It leaves you with a smaller mortgage and in a better financial position.
It may be a much larger mortgage and worse financial position if house prices have increased while you have been saving (chasing your tail)
'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
-
Possibly because the taxpayers ends up propping them up when things go wrong. This applies to both the lender and borrower it appears.
How many times does it need to be said that, with the possible exception of NR, the bail-outs weren't brought about by defaults on UK mortgage business?0 -
I know there are people on here that don't agree, but I'd still like to see rigid wage multiples being adhered to, what we would have then is no one over extending, house prices would rise with wage inflation which is good for everyone. People nearing retirement and downsizing would still make a tidy profit, but people buying in at the bottom wouldn't suffer as prices would have risen with wages meaning they wouldn't be any worse off than the previous generation.
Of course many people who've owned for decades don't want this, they want to maximise any price rises they can while sticking the middle finger at the people born later.
To me this is blatantly unfair and greedy. Prices have risen too much too quickly, as a result hundreds of thousands of families are forced to dump their kids into 12 hour childcare so both parents can go out to work to pay the banks their mortgage interest.Have owned outright since Sept 2009, however I'm of the firm belief that high prices are a cancer on society, they have sucked money out of the economy, handing it to banks who've squandered it.0 -
add the "massive" Bradford & Bingley and the "massive" random scottich (Dumfernline was it??) building society to that list please.How many times does it need to be said that, with the possible exception of NR, the bail-outs weren't brought about by defaults on UK mortgage business?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.6K Life & Family
- 261.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards