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
-
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.
Alternatively, to enjoy a standard of living undreamed of only 30 years ago.0 -
Alternatively, to enjoy a standard of living undreamed of only 30 years ago.
If, by 'standard of living' you mean being caught up in the shallow world of materialism, then I agree. However if your priorities lie in spending time nurturing and bonding with your children then I'd say standards have fallen.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 -
If, by 'standard of living' you mean being caught up in the shallow world of materialism, then I agree. However if your priorities lie in spending time nurturing and bonding with your children then I'd say standards have fallen.
In your opinion. Clearly, others hold different views, which is why they live how they do. Are we to assume you object to that?0 -
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?
I have been trying to get that one over for around three years
to quote that evil nasty guy with a little moustache, no not Charlie, 'Mein Kampf'. Oh BTW I don't include NR as an exception. '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 -
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.
My first mortgage was around 60% of my income at the time , you are dealing in illusion'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 -
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?
What about SMI?
What about holding back repo's?
I'm a bit bored of this "it was all the US's fault, no it wasn't, yes it was, no it wasn't"....we had issues with unaffordable lending regardless of the US. SOME of it was to do with the US, but not all. We can't blame the US for our mortgage regulation.
The US merely popped before us. We'd have got to popping stage, even if the US didn't.
Even if we ignore the fact were supporting banks, we are still supporting borrowers, and this keeps it seems, being ignored.0 -
a whole lot of generalisations in that post - apples and oranges aren't the same fruit just like the causes of the USA's housing/banking/economic issues aren't the same as the UK's housing/banking/economic issues.Graham_Devon wrote: »I'm a bit bored of this "it was all the US's fault, no it wasn't, yes it was, no it wasn't"....we had issues with unaffordable lending regardless of the US. SOME of it was to do with the US, but not all. We can't blame the US for our mortgage regulation.
The US merely popped before us. We'd have got to popping stage, even if the US didn't.
different things, different causes - understanding them is the key...0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Even if we ignore the fact were supporting banks, we are still supporting borrowers, and this keeps it seems, being ignored.
We support renters also, it's called the welfare system.
Unless you are going to single out owners to have less right to support as renters when they get in trouble lose jobs etc. what can you do.
It's not being ignored, it is just a dud point as it is welfare payment, one that is significantly lower in most cases than equiverlent rental prices (If they rented they would get housing benefit , should we stop that?)
I think thats being ignored.0 -
If, by 'standard of living' you mean being caught up in the shallow world of materialism, then I agree. However if your priorities lie in spending time nurturing and bonding with your children then I'd say standards have fallen.
Sorry Ad, (again).
What a load of ol' rot.
So in the past everyone spent all their spare time with their kids, they were all deliriously happy as they never went anywhere but they ate bread and jam together.
Then came along nasty labels and brand names. Suddenly no-one wanted to know their family as they wanted to go to earn money to buy labels.
It's perfectly possible to have a job, (both parents), to see plenty of your kids, to do plenty with them, (and yes, some of it for free), but to allow them time away from you. The time away from you (school, with friends, playgroups, even childminder etc) also allows them to grow as individuals.
It is also possible that all of you, occasionally, enjoy spending some money on something that makes you smile. Sometimes that happens to be a label.
The world is so impoverished by house prices? Don't make me laugh.
Drama queen.0 -
I However if your priorities lie in spending time nurturing and bonding with your children then I'd say standards have fallen.
I would have to disgree on that one AD, perhaps your average woman does spend less time at home with the baby than 50 years ago.
But for sure the average farther spends a lot more time with their child than 50 years ago.
Gone are the days of finish a shift, home for wife prepared tea then off to the pub for the night.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
- 604.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.6K Life & Family
- 261.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards