House price falls would be excellent for the economy

blueboy43

ILW wrote: »

Not sure about US, but in Ireland they now have more houses than people.

Of course that's a load of old rubbish, but sounds wonderful.

However something like 550,000 homes were built in Ireland in the last 10 years. One third of the housing stock.

To do the same, the UK would have to build about 7 million new houses.

abaxas

chucky wrote: »

wrong and very, very far from what is good for the economy.

That would depends on term.

Since a parliamentary cycle is 4-5 years. I will agree, but long term no.

The_Fox_3

chucky wrote: »

wrong and very, very far from what is good for the economy.

Is that it... Lol

Well explain to us why dear boy ....

Actually don't bother, its only going to be made up anyway rather than based on honest opinion

chucky

The_Fox wrote: »

Is that it... Lol

Well explain to us why dear boy ....

Actually don't bother, its only going to be made up anyway rather than based on honest opinion

yes, that's it. this young man seemed to understand where you didn't.

abaxas wrote: »

That would depends on term.

Since a parliamentary cycle is 4-5 years. I will agree, but long term no.

martinbuckley

RenovationMan wrote: »

I think it was the same in the US. Certainly there were reports of them demolishing New Towns. You dont do that if you have a housing shortage. The other thing about the US is that it is so large geographically that not only do they have a lot of cheap land to build houses on but it also means that the distances are too great to easily commute between cities.

How come your footer figure never changes RM? Nationwide values a £450,000 house from Q2 of 2010 at £433,090 now.

chucknorris

RenovationMan wrote: »

I havent had the house valued since we bought it, so all I have to plan against is the original purchase price. When I remortgage at the end of my current deal I will have the house revalued for the mortgage and will update the signature and see how my overpayments stack up against the new valuation.

The Nationwide figure is an average of asking prices across the whole country and so would not represent any sort of accurate figure on the actual value of my house. Even a valuation for a mortgage is a bit hit and miss, the only real way to know what my house is actually worth is to sell it, but would be a bit of an extreme way to calculate my home ownership percentages.

Additionally of course you are also renovating the house, so adding value.

Percy1983

Where would this wave of buyers come from, as it is if the sensible mortgage lending currently in place contiunes it will just short the time needed to get deposits, all us savers wouldn't suddenly be able to buy.

Just a thought on the long term economy, if myself and my generation all get houses at 30% less that will translate to a whole generation having more spending money for the next 25 years, surely that would help the economy along?

DervProf

chucky wrote: »

wrong and very, very far from what is good for the economy.

Short/medium term, yes.

Long term, I think lower house prices would be a benefit to the economy.

chucky

DervProf wrote: »

Short/medium term, yes.

Long term, I think lower house prices would be a benefit to the economy.

it's not really about short term or even long term.

the Fox says falling house prices are a good thing for the economy - they're 100% not and would cripple the economy, he's wrong yet again.

if the Fox had said that lower house prices were good for the economy he would be right but that's not what he said, they are both very different things.

DervProf

chucky wrote: »

it's not really about short term or even long term.

the Fox says falling house prices are a good thing for the economy - they're 100% not and would cripple the economy, he's wrong yet again.

if the Fox had said that lower house prices were good for the economy he would be right but that's not what he said, they are both very different things.

Eh ?

Are you just trying to prove The_Fox wrong ? If you are, then I think you are missing the point here. For a start, it is worth debating the pro's and con's of cheaper property prices over the short and long term (yes, I know there is a difference between falling and fallen house prices). I also have to disagree with your conclusion that falling house prices would cripple the economy. If house prices fall 2% per annum for the next 10 years, I doubt that the economy would be "crippled".