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!
You aint seen nothing yet: Why house prices could fall another 20%
Comments
-
No I have said now for the 40th time that it is the growth of the middle class and part time jobs that brings the average wage to where it is.
The upper classes have not really changed as a percentage of earners. 6,000 can hardly skew 30,000,000 that much.
It stands to reason 10,000,000 earning less than £12K will have a greater drag than 6,000 earning £1M.
I know you don't like maths but get your calculator on.0 -
The Tories may want lower house prices (do they?) but just talking about it isn't going to make any difference.
Now if they relaxed planning permission and subsidised house building, we'd be talking.
Good to see them 'walk the walk'
News that councils in England are to get greater powers to stop developers building on gardens has been welcomed in one small corner of south-west London.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10275776'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 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »
Dunno what all your guff is about with middle classes, makes absolutely no difference to these calculations, or the context in which we are talking.
Caught the edit, so how are 10M part time workers relevant to a full time male wage in the 60s?
Context!!!! you need to look it up, todays average wage (all jobs) is not the equal measure of a mans full time wage 50 years ago. (what was needed to buy a house)
A mans full time wage now is?????0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »According to Oxfam more than 13 million people in the UK live in poverty. That's 20% of the population.
Paints a totally different picture of the real situation in the UK.
It does, but Oxfam aren;y being very honest. I think their figures are based on the work of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation who describe it thus:
"In 2008/09, 13½ million people in the UK were living in households below the 60% low-income threshold after deducting housing costs. This is around a fifth (22%) of the population."
More info here:
http://www.poverty.org.uk/01/index.shtml?20 -
-
"In 2008/09, 13½ million people in the UK were living in households below the 60% low-income threshold after deducting housing costs. This is around a fifth (22%) of the population."
More info here:
http://www.poverty.org.uk/01/index.shtml?2
I wonder what the figures are for 2010?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards