Repo's up and some startling numbers

geneer

RenovationMan wrote: »

Why would it make a difference when ISTL bought? He simply said he maxed out his finances to buy a house (I presume it was a nicer house than he would have had if he hadn't maxed out?). He didn't state what type of house he bought, just that he had to max out his finances to buy it. He could have maxed out his finances to buy his house in 2010, ten years after your proposed year 2000 date, or any date in between. What difference does it make?



Sorry, I don't understand how ISTL maxing out his finances to buy a house relates to you and what you could have afforded back in 2000 or indeed what you could afford today?

And what exactly does "maxed out" mean then?

Thats why hes asking.

geneer

RenovationMan wrote: »

Yes you're wrong. You are falling into the same trap that all those HPI cheerleading clowns did at the infamous diner parties. You don't benefit from HPI if you don't own investment property and if you are moving up the housing ladder.

My first 2 bed house cost £40k in 1995. At the same time a 4 bed detached house would have cost £80k. A £40k difference between the two.

In 2002 I sold my first house for £100k and bought a 4 bed detached for £180k. An £80k difference between the two.

By my calculations, it cost me £40k MORE to buy my detached house in 2002 than it would have cost in 1995. All due to HPI, so where is my 'profit'?

Load of toss.

You might of course have benefitted more if had house prices not increased.

But theres little doubt that your considerably better of that those who weren't lucky enough to be dropped into the world in a specific decade, or who simply couldn't afford a place pre bubble.

That said it would be quite wrong to take much credit for random good fortune.

Pimperne1

geneer wrote: »

Load of toss.

You might of course have benefitted more if had house prices not increased.

But theres little doubt that your considerably better of that those who weren't lucky enough to be dropped into the world in a specific decade, or who simply couldn't afford a place pre bubble.

That said it would be quite wrong to take much credit for random good fortune.

Although, for your part, you too were dropped into the world in a specific decade when you could afford a place pre bubble. I think you are on record of saying that you "could'a, would'a, should'a bought" (but didn't)?

You would be right to be disgruntled if your disenfranchisement was from your own actions.

RenovationMan

shortchanged wrote: »

Well how come quite a few people I know who bought originally a couple years before the boom prices (they are only 3 or 4 years older than me) are now living in 4 or 5 bedroom executive houses and are virtually mortgage free. They also have had nothing to do with BTL's and don't earn massively more than our income.

I assume that if they are virtually mortgage free then they must have almost paid off their mortgages?

RenovationMan

geneer wrote: »

Load of toss.

You might of course have benefitted more if had house prices not increased.

But theres little doubt that your considerably better of that those who weren't lucky enough to be dropped into the world in a specific decade, or who simply couldn't afford a place pre bubble.

That said it would be quite wrong to take much credit for random good fortune.

The discussion wasn't about whether I was 'better off' than shortchanged (or indeed yourself), it was whether I had gained from HPI. I'm glad to see that at least you agree that home owners haven't. Hardly 'toss' then.

Someone who is 10 years older than me and working in a similarly paid job would be 'better off' than me because they had 10 years longer to build up their assets (pension plans, investments, savings, house equity, etc) and 10 years longer to pay down their mortgages. You will be better off than someone 10 years younger than you. Then we die and our kids get what's left after taxation and nursing home fees. It's the circle of life. Just be glad that you have your youth.

Having argued for most of a page that I am worse off due to HPI I could hardly claim credit for good fortune?

geneer

Pimperne1 wrote: »

Although, for your part, you too were dropped into the world in a specific decade when you could afford a place pre bubble. I think you are on record of saying that you "could'a, would'a, should'a bought" (but didn't)?

You would be right to be disgruntled if your disenfranchisement was from your own actions.

Transpires that they don't hand mortgages out to school kids or University students pimpernil.

Naturally when I was compelled to give buying serious consideration I was also forced to conclude that they were too expensive.

I'm actually still younger than the average FTB.

RenovationMan

geneer wrote: »

Transpires that they don't hand mortgages out to school kids or University students pimpernil.

Naturally when I was compelled to give buying serious consideration I was also forced to conclude that they were too expensive.

I'm actually still younger than the average FTB.

How old are you?

geneer

RenovationMan wrote: »

The discussion wasn't about whether I was 'better off' than shortchanged (or indeed yourself), it was whether I had gained from HPI. I'm glad to see that at least you agree that home owners haven't. Hardly 'toss' then.

Fair enough.
I did also say I agreed with you on this point.
And when Shortchanged was mentioning that you bought 10 years before, it did seem implicit that the comparison would be made against someone who hadn't.

RenovationMan wrote: »

Someone who is 10 years older than me and working in a similarly paid job would be 'better off' than me because they had 10 years longer to build up their assets (pension plans, investments, savings, house equity, etc) and 10 years longer to pay down their mortgages. You will be better off than someone 10 years younger than you. Then we die and our kids get what's left after taxation and nursing home fees. It's the circle of life. Just be glad that you have your youth.

Maybe. Maybe not.
It seems the "each generation better of than the last" equation came to a bit of a standstill with the boomers.
Id say the jury is out on the generation after me.

RenovationMan wrote: »

Having argued for most of a page that I am worse off due to HPI I could hardly claim credit for good fortune?

Couldn't agree more.
Yet it doesn't stop you trying on occasion, does it?

geneer

RenovationMan wrote: »

How old are you?

Younger than the average FTB.

RenovationMan

geneer wrote: »

Maybe. Maybe not.
It seems the "each generation better of than the last" equation came to a bit of a standstill with the boomers.
Id say the jury is out on the generation after me.

Well the boomers were before me and yet I don't moan because they are 'better off' than me.

My kids are the generation you are talking about (the generation ofter you. One has ambitions to become a doctor, even though it means she will be in debt to the tune of about £50k. I have a feeling that their generation will be like your generation and like my generation. Some of them will moan and b itch about their lot. Some of them will just get on with their lives and make the best of it. I'm thinking my daughters will fall into the former, but you never know. Perhaps I didn't hug and kiss them enough and they will hate everyone who is doing 'better' than them?

geneer wrote: »

Couldn't agree more.
Yet it doesn't stop you trying on occasion, does it?

Please show any post of mine where I revel in HPI? Or where I claim that I have done well from HPI? Or in any way claimed that HPI is 'good fortune'.