At What Age Did You Move Out Of Mummy And Daddys?

Cleaver

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

There is no point saying yes yes we know this and then trying to make me look just the same as a BTL landlord for putting my house deposit in a savings account.

There is nothing i can do to stop the banks pi55ing about with the money savers entrust to them, but a landlord can choose not to make a living off other peoples backs.

No, I agree that it's not the same on an ethical scale though. But you can discuss it. I'm not saying you're the same as a BTL landlord for having a savings account. If you feel that BTL is unethical then I respect that, and fair dos. I'm just saying that it's difficult to think of an investment that isn't fully ethical, in that it doesn't push the price of something up or effect someone in a negative way.

Another example. I own a share which went up (and I then sold, making a profit) when they announced that they were outsourcing a portion of their business. So I basically made money on the annoucement that people here would lose their jobs. And I'm still not sure how I feel about that, but then that's life.

Do you have any stock market investments like this? How do you feel about them?

I miss people on this forum that we can have these discussions with. Is anyone else out there?

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

Did your tenant really have a fantastic experience paying off your house:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Yes, I think so. We had a card and flowers when they moved out so I think they were happy. We bought them a nice leaving gift too.

We rented our home for two years to a couple with a young child. They were moving to Italy, sold their house, then his job fell through. They didn't know what to do. They decided they were still going to go (he was an academic or something in Latin something or other) so they decided to rent for a few years and move to Italy when their son was slightly older. They were great tenants and we got to know them well when they kept giving notice towards then end, then cancelling, then giving notice etc. etc. as they kept getting messed around by their new employer in Italy. In the end I popped round and said that they had been their for a few years, always been great people and they could just be dead flexible with their notice. If they wanted to give us a week or two then that's fine. They said thanks and invited us round for dinner. So we had the odd, but nice, experience of having dinner cooked for us by the couple who rented our house.

It is possible to have happy people, who rent because they want or need to, and get a landlord who is good to them. It's just a mutually beneficial business arrangement.

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

How did you manage to justify in your head the fact that the HOME you purchased to make a PROFIT from had now been taken from somebody who wanted to buy it to live in it.

I don't need to justify that, in the same way someone who makes a sandwich which costs them a £1 to make and sells it to someone else for £2.50 doesn't need to justify that. It's a business. A customer buys a product or service from someone. Simple as that.

You've put 'HOME' in capital letters as if that should make me feel guilty, but I have investments in many things that are seen as basic human needs: water, gas, electricty, healthcare, drugs etc. etc. Should I get rid of all of them?

I just get a bit tired of this houlier than thou view of people against landlords on here. Get off your high horse. Are all your investments really that ethical? Are they all whiter than white? Do you avoid investing all companies that aren't squeeky clean? I don't like Tesco and won't shop there for ethical reasons. But I don't ram it down people's throats and question why they shop there. It's their business and not going to Tesco is my personal decision. Same if someone wants to buy a house to let it out. If you don't like it, don't ever do it and don't ever rent a house. Simple.

Percy1983

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

Lots of parents dont give their children handouts, they just let their children continue living at home until they have saved a deposit, everybody i know who is doing this is paying their own way in life and costing their parents nothing.

J_i_m wrote: »

Moved out at 26, moved back in at 28 due to financial struggles.

Saving for a mortgage and hope to be back out again in 2 to 4 years.

I would also stress that you can live unnderneath your parents roof yet still live a independent and responsible life, I work full time, I pay towards the bills, provide and cook my own food and also do my own laundry. I did that long before moving out, and I do so still.

It was a drag having to give up my own space, it was a joy not having to share a bathroom and kitchen, but I'm working on a rather more stable future.

This is very much my situation, living in the same build and living under there wing can be 2 separate things.

Either way nobody can argue that with my current options staying put is by far the best choice.

Jimmy_31

Cleaver wrote: »

No, I agree that it's not the same on an ethical scale though. But you can discuss it. I'm not saying you're the same as a BTL landlord for having a savings account. If you feel that BTL is unethical then I respect that, and fair dos. I'm just saying that it's difficult to think of an investment that isn't fully ethical, in that it doesn't push the price of something up or effect someone in a negative way.

Another example. I own a share which went up (and I then sold, making a profit) when they announced that they were outsourcing a portion of their business. So I basically made money on the annoucement that people here would lose their jobs. And I'm still not sure how I feel about that, but then that's life.

Do you have any stock market investments like this? How do you feel about them?

I miss people on this forum that we can have these discussions with. Is anyone else out there?



Yes, I think so. We had a card and flowers when they moved out so I think they were happy. We bought them a nice leaving gift too.

We rented our home for two years to a couple with a young child. They were moving to Italy, sold their house, then his job fell through. They didn't know what to do. They decided they were still going to go (he was an academic or something in Latin something or other) so they decided to rent for a few years and move to Italy when their son was slightly older. They were great tenants and we got to know them well when they kept giving notice towards then end, then cancelling, then giving notice etc. etc. as they kept getting messed around by their new employer in Italy. In the end I popped round and said that they had been their for a few years, always been great people and they could just be dead flexible with their notice. If they wanted to give us a week or two then that's fine. They said thanks and invited us round for dinner. So we had the odd, but nice, experience of having dinner cooked for us by the couple who rented our house.

It is possible to have happy people, who rent because they want or need to, and get a landlord who is good to them. It's just a mutually beneficial business arrangement.



I don't need to justify that, in the same way someone who makes a sandwich which costs them a £1 to make and sells it to someone else for £2.50 doesn't need to justify that. It's a business. A customer buys a product or service from someone. Simple as that.

You've put 'HOME' in capital letters as if that should make me feel guilty, but I have investments in many things that are seen as basic human needs: water, gas, electricty, healthcare, drugs etc. etc. Should I get rid of all of them?

I just get a bit tired of this houlier than thou view of people against landlords on here. Get off your high horse. Are all your investments really that ethical? Are they all whiter than white? Do you avoid investing all companies that aren't squeeky clean? I don't like Tesco and won't shop there for ethical reasons. But I don't ram it down people's throats and question why they shop there. It's their business and not going to Tesco is my personal decision. Same if someone wants to buy a house to let it out. If you don't like it, don't ever do it and don't ever rent a house. Simple.

so let me get this right.

Shopping at tescos = bad

Buying a house to profit from = good.

A house is not a sandwich mate, it is shelter, people make a sandwich then sell it to make a profit, the profit from the sandwiches will someday get the sandwich seller enough profit so that they can then go and buy a house (shelter).

Yes i think you should get rid of all your investments in basic human needs.

Fcuk tescos:)

Cleaver

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

so let me get this right.

Shopping at tescos = bad

Buying a house to profit from = good.

Is this what discussion on this forum has distilled down to? Seriously?

No, it's not as simple as those two statements. My moral objections with Tesco (and ASDA / Walmart) are mainly regarding their agressive business plans in terms of their purposefuly mistreatment of local businesses, land-banking, treatment of suppliers, not using local and British produce and products and the way in which they treat their customers and employers. For all of those reasons I don't shop at either places. But that's a completely personal choice, I have no problem with what other people do. And the majority of people seem to have no problem with either shops, so they continue to do well.

Also, what does "buying a house for profit = good" actually mean? What do you want me to say? I think there were probably around two dozen reasons why house prices went mental over the past ten or so years. I think BTL was one of those reasons, but only one of them.

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

A house is not a sandwich mate, it is shelter, people make a sandwich then sell it to make a profit, the profit from the sandwiches will someday get the sandwich seller enough profit so that they can then go and buy a house (shelter).

Or they can rent a house with the money they make. Not everyone wants to buy a house.

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

Yes i think you should get rid of all your investments in basic human needs.

Fair enough. And it's nice you're starting to give at least a bit of information about your ethical stance. So can we take it that you don't have any stock market trackers or traditional investment vehicles that would include property?

Do you have a pension? Presumably you do. If so, what's it invested in?

Jimmy_31

Cleaver wrote: »

Is this what discussion on this forum has distilled down to? Seriously?

No, it's not as simple as those two statements. My moral objections with Tesco (and ASDA / Walmart) are mainly regarding their agressive business plans in terms of their purposefuly mistreatment of local businesses, land-banking, treatment of suppliers, not using local and British produce and products and the way in which they treat their customers and employers. For all of those reasons I don't shop at either places. But that's a completely personal choice, I have no problem with what other people do. And the majority of people seem to have no problem with either shops, so they continue to do well.

Also, what does "buying a house for profit = good" actually mean? What do you want me to say? I think there were probably around two dozen reasons why house prices went mental over the past ten or so years. I think BTL was one of those reasons, but only one of them.



Or they can rent a house with the money they make. Not everyone wants to buy a house.



Fair enough. And it's nice you're starting to give at least a bit of information about your ethical stance. So can we take it that you don't have any stock market trackers or traditional investment vehicles that would include property?

Do you have a pension? Presumably you do. If so, what's it invested in?

No pension, no investments, no stocks shares or whatever, just money in the bank to buy a house with, i would keep the money at home but it would get robbed on the next burglary so im stuck with that for now, i live in a 5hithole you see.

Oh so you are against land banking, kinda like hoarding houses for profit that aint it:)

Cleaver

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

No pension, no investments, no stocks shares or whatever, just money in the bank to buy a house with, i would keep the money at home but it would get robbed on the next burglary so im stuck with that for now, i live in a 5hithole you see.

You have no investments or pension? Why not?

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

Oh so you are against land banking, kinda like hoarding houses for profit that aint it:)

No, I'd say they are different things.

Jimmy_31

Cleaver wrote: »

You have no investments or pension? Why not?



No, I'd say they are different things.

The reason i have no investments or pension is because i cant afford any, thousands of other people are in exactly the same boat as me.

How can people pay into a pension or start investing if the wage they earn doesnt even cover the household bills.

People hoard land to make a profit.
people hoard houses to make a profit.

wymondham

<18

Sagz wrote: »

Personally, I don' t think a person really 'grows-up' until they leave home.

Probably true, although I still don't feel grown up, at 43!

Cleaver

Jimmy_31 wrote: »

The reason i have no investments or pension is because i cant afford any, thousands of other people are in exactly the same boat as me.

Haven't you saved tens of thousands as a deposit for a house? If you're doing that can afford to contribute to a pension.

Most of the research on pensions show that young people don't invest in pensions because they don't understand them, don't see the point and prefer to spend the money on other stuff, not because they can't afford them. You would presumably fit in to the last one, in that you've concentrated just on a house deposit and gone for an 'eggs in one basket' approach.

lostinrates

wymondham wrote: »

Probably true, although I still don't feel grown up, at 43!

I feel way less grown up than I did at 16 or 18, or 14 come to think of it.

I'd say the ''when you grow up'' thing depends on more than where you live, and can happen or not according to experience and individual.