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
What will be the house price average in 2016?
Comments
-
Yes but were these other actions purely to keep house prices stable though? As it seems to me that most of the measures you refer to above - SMI changes , halt to repossessions - were to keep people in their homes during a recession, as having a substantial amount of people needing to be housed during a time of economic turmoil isn't the best situation to be in.
Does this negate what I said? You could say the same for any amount of stimulus we chucked at the housing market.
If the government tommorow wiped off everyones mortgage, you could suggest that that was to stop people needing to be housed during economic turmoil as its not the best situation to be in.
In every situation you can come up with that conclusion. But it doesn't detract from the fact that house prices were allowed to surge, and the response has been to protect the market from otherwise natural corrections.
Simple fact is, lots of stimulus has taken place. I'm not sure if you are disagreeing with that, or not?0 -
Graham_Devon wrote: »Simple fact is, lots of stimulus has taken place. I'm not sure if you are disagreeing with that, or not?
I'm not disagreeing on the stimulus, just the reasons for this.0 -
-
Graham_Devon wrote: »I didn't realise I'd given any reasons or taken issue with them if I'd given them. Just said everything had been pulled out of the hat to stop prices from falling.
But fair enough.
Hang on - you've just answered your own question there it seems?
I'm of the opinion that SMI payments, repossession reductions, and low interest rates were mechanisms to deal with the recession and subsequent after-effects.
It appears to me that you believe they were enacted to stop house prices falling.
Apologies if i'm barking up the wrong tree there but it looks like we have a difference of opinion.0 -
Apologies if i'm barking up the wrong tree there but it looks like we have a difference of opinion.
Looks like we do.
SMI is being continuously paid at the moment for some. Indeed, many of those people having huge amounts of equity in their homes, which if needed, they could sell, and then use the equity to rent a place they CAN afford.
I'd suggest there is an element of a prop there.
However, I'm happy to leave it as a simple difference of opinion.0 -
If this poll is anything to go by then there is no hurry to buy a house anytime soon.0
-
If this poll is anything to go by then there is no hurry to buy a house anytime soon.
Don't make any decisions based on a poll of 31.
That said, your interpretation of the poll is puzzling.
71% think house prices will be more expensive, yet you think there is no rush.
If I thought there was going to be a 71% risk of rain, I'd take an umbrella (P.S. Yesterdays F1 had a 60% chance of rain and we know how that panned out):wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
As has already been said I think figures are pretty meaningless due to probable devaluation. Still think all bets are still off due to general energy depletion. I wouldn't like to make any hard calls for any major issue within the next 10-15 years.
We're on the last scraps of the cheap oil the greases every single aspect of the world economy. Inflation will continue to stay high now all the way through any forseeable future as petrol on diesel continue their hike skywards.
Still think that war, famine and breakdown of our current civilisation is the most likely outcome within 15 years.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 -
Still think that war, famine and breakdown of our current civilisation is the most likely outcome within 15 years.
That or zombies. Everyone forgets about them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-137137980
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards