House price falls would be excellent for the economy

chucky

DervProf wrote: »

Thanks for the non-patronising encouragement. Note that it is me that is trying to conduct a civilised and sensible discussion, if you want a verbal battle, I might play, but I'd prefer to engage without the insults and put downs. This is a trait of the VI's, you sensibly suggest something that doesn't fit in with their financial plan, and you get dismissed, patronised, or just called names.

DervProf wrote: »

What it really was, was me thinking beyond my own four walls/ bank balance. It was me, throwing around a few thoughts/suggestions, which might not happen to fit the wishes and (wet)dreams of a property investor, but might actually make sense to those of us who don't worship the value of the properties that we live in.

i'm more than happy to play your 'innocent' game, i'm also more than happy to be amicable with you but it seems that you like to post stuff like the above and then when it's given back you don't seem to like it. shame that, my heart bleeds for you...

btw, why would i care what you think, if it's in my financial plan or because i have VI? why would it bother me, who are you anyway?? you seem to be flattering yourself quite a bit here...

DervProf wrote: »

If/when I do sell my house, I will hope to sell it for a price that is relative to what similar properties in similar areas sell for. This will enable me to buy another property to live in. I won't be looking to "profit" from the sale of my house. If it fetches exactly what I paid for it >15 years ago, then what do I care ? It will almost certainly mean that I won't have to find as much money to buy my next place to live in.

so you're not going to sell it for more than 3 times salary and going to get as much as possible in the market and probably benefit from HPI which is quite the opposite from wanting lower house prices.

if you're morally so righteous and don't worship the value of the properties that you live in why don't you actually sell the property for what a local person can afford. if you don't you're just as bad as those think about their bank balance and have these alleged (wet)dreams of a property investor.

chucky

shortchanged wrote: »

Well it was my attempt at an obtuse chucky moment.

please try again, maybe you'll get there on your 27th attempt at putting together a coherent or even correct post.

poor shortchanged, he does try hard...

shortchanged_2

Oh chucky, I dream of the day when the 'please try again' and 'best start again' buttons break on your keyboard.

shortchanged_2

chucky wrote: »

please try again, maybe you'll get there on your 27th attempt at putting together a coherent or even correct post.

poor shortchanged, he does try hard...

Thanks for the concern but I'm alright jack.

chucky

shortchanged wrote: »

Oh chucky, I dream of the day when the 'please try again' and 'best start again' buttons break on your keyboard.

most people think about realistic stuff like their family, work or even what they're going to do at the weekend.

you dream about other strangers on an internet forum,
you are quite strange with strange dreams... lucky for you that you found the internet...

DervProf

chucky wrote: »

if you're morally so righteous and don't worship the value of the properties that you live in why don't you actually sell the property for what a local person can afford. if you don't you're just as bad as those think about their bank balance and have these alleged (wet)dreams of a property investor.

I think you have suggested this to me before.

I think it is clear that I would like property prices to be affordable for a larger proportion of the population, and that does include myself.

I think you are suggesting that because this is my wish, that I should do something very charitable and sell my house for less than it's true relative value to similar properties.

You are trying to say that my wish for all properties prices to be lower, contradicts me possibly wishing for a sale price for my own property which is relative to others.

OK, I'll elaborate. I would like to see 2 bed semis sell for 3 x the average wage (maybe a bit less than 3 x the average wage). This means that my 2 bed semi may well be worth less than it is now. I am happy to accept that. I would also like to see others share the same good fortune that I have had in my life, like when I had a bit of good luck on the lottery. That shouldn't mean that I should give away what I won, should it ? If property prices increase ten fold in the next five years, I won't be happy that FTBers have to find so much money to afford a place to live, and I won't be any happier that my place is worth 10x what it is today.

Here's another analogy. I have a very nice PC. I paid a fair bit for it (in terms of the parts that I have built it with). I wish people less well off than me could afford to get the same enjoyment out of owning a decent PC. Unless PC prices fall, those people will miss out. I want PC prices to fall, it benefits more people. Does that mean that I am being hypocritical or contradicting myself if I sell my PC at market value for an upgrade ? If PC values plummet, then I get my wish for wider PC ownership, and my next upgrade will cost me less.

chucky

DervProf wrote: »

I think you have suggested this to me before.

I think it is clear that I would like property prices to be affordable for a larger proportion of the population, and that does include myself.

I think you are suggesting that because this is my wish, that I should do something very charitable and sell my house for less than it's true relative value to similar properties.

You are trying to say that my wish for all properties prices to be lower, contradicts me possibly wishing for a sale price for my own property which is relative to others.

OK, I'll elaborate. I would like to see 2 bed semis sell for 3 x the average wage (maybe a bit less than 3 x the average wage). This means that my 2 bed semi may well be worth less than it is now. I am happy to accept that. I would also like to see others share the same good fortune that I have had in my life, like when I had a bit of good luck on the lottery. That shouldn't mean that I should give away what I won, should it ? If property prices increase ten fold in the next five years, I won't be happy that FTBers have to find so much money to afford a place to live, and I won't be any happier that my place is worth 10x what it is today.

Here's another analogy. I have a very nice PC. I paid a fair bit for it (in terms of the parts that I have built it with). I wish people less well off than me could afford to get the same enjoyment out of owning a decent PC. Unless PC prices fall, those people will miss out. I want PC prices to fall, it benefits more people. Does that mean that I am being hypocritical or contradicting myself if I sell my PC at market value for an upgrade ? If PC values plummet, then I get my wish for wider PC ownership, and my next upgrade will cost me less.

you have a good heart Dervprof, unfortunately all of these things never work in the way that it is right or even correct. most of these things are out of our control and governments and or regulators should be doing much more but they don't.

you either make the most of the opportunities or you watch others do so - i'm not just talking property, i'm talking everything here.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

DervProf wrote: »

I would like property prices to be affordable for a larger proportion of the population.

They were. Until mortgage rationing.

The percentage of houses in owner occupation is declining. Despite houses now being cheaper.

I would like to see 2 bed semis sell for 3 x the average wage (maybe a bit less than 3 x the average wage).

OK, but that would be significantly less than the historical average. More like the prices paid at the absolute troughs of the housing cycles.

Putting that aside for the moment, FTB houses do tend to sell for around 3.5 times the income of those that buy them, on average.

Lowering the price would not make any more people able to buy the limited stock of housing.... Only increasing the number of houses can do that.



.

DervProf

chucky wrote: »

you have a good heart Dervprof, unfortunately all of these things never work in the way that it is right or even correct. most of these things are out of our control and governments and or regulators should be doing much more but they don't.

you either make the most of the opportunities or you watch others do so - i'm not just talking property, i'm talking everything here.

chucky, we are now getting somewhere. I realise that what I want, and what I get are often two different things. Sadly, what I wish for in the property market is becoming less likely. I think it's far from impossible though. With some longer sighted, less self-interested plans from the government, it could be done. The longer it isn't done, or is just ignored "because it would damage the economy" or "we don't have the space to build the new homes", the harder it will be to make life better for future generations.

Jimmy_31

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

They were. Until mortgage rationing.

The percentage of houses in owner occupation is declining. Despite houses now being cheaper.



OK, but that would be significantly less than the historical average. More like the prices paid at the absolute troughs of the housing cycles.

Putting that aside for the moment, FTB houses do tend to sell for around 3.5 times the income of those that buy them, on average.

Lowering the price would not make any more people able to buy the limited stock of housing.... Only increasing the number of houses can do that.



.

Hamish is right houses were perfectly affordable before responsible lending kicked back in, i could have purchased a new build 2 bed terrace for over 200k no problems, mind you i could never have moved into it because after paying the mortgage there wouldnt be any money left to run the house

The bank told me i could afford the house that i described above so i asked them how do they suggest i run a house and vehicle and also feed myself on a few hundred quid a month that i would have left after paying the mortgage, the mortgage "specialist" told me its a lot cheaper to run a house than you think.

Most of my friends paid boom prices and are now skint because most of their wages go towards a boom price mortgage payment and the little money they did have left over is getting eaten up by rising costs of everything else.
Affordable must mean different things to me and you hamish because if i had bought an overpriced home that i could afford then it would have made me unable to afford to save up, buy a new van for work, buy new tools for work, fix the boiler, repairs on vehicle etc etc, affording an overpriced home makes you unable to afford anything else.