ups and downs of housing market who benefited

Thrugelmir

Lewis1967 wrote: »

My Great Grandfathers time, most men were married in their 20's and could buy their own house and land for a couple of years average earnings.

I must have been reading the wrong history books all these years if that was the case.

Percy1983

I can see the biggest problem now is many don't have a choice to stay home with children as 2 incomes are needed to keep the house for said children.

As it is we are quite lucky in the sense my other half works in school so school holidays aren't a problem and I have a 9-5 mon-fri career (could go 8-4 in my current job) so it seems if we have children they will grow up knowing who mum and dad are, but many children hardly get to see there parents these days as there parents both have to work constantly to provide for them.

Its quite sad really and the damage to society is starting to show.

FTBFun

Lewis1967 wrote: »

My Great Grandfathers time, most men were married in their 20's and could buy their own house and land for a couple of years average earnings.

Given that my late grandfather was born in 1921, my great grandfather's generation were getting machine gunned by the thousands so I suspect there was a little more to be concerned about than house prices.

Property distribution was considerably less even than today's standards anyway. Isn't this fairly obvious?

FTBFun

A bit old this but was the first I could find:

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp99/rp99-111.pdf

Owner occupancy in 1914 was 10%. It didn't go higher than 50% until the 1970s.

quantic

I think in the future it will become evident that by far the biggest loser in the housing game are the many many kids who where brought up without seeing very much of either of their parents. There are very few families now days that can afford to keep even a modest house and have 1 income.

What is even more surprising, is the sheer number of unemployed single mothers I see dropping their kids off to nursery (while they go for a bit of shopping).

ukcarper

Percy1983 wrote: »

I can see the biggest problem now is many don't have a choice to stay home with children as 2 incomes are needed to keep the house for said children.

As it is we are quite lucky in the sense my other half works in school so school holidays aren't a problem and I have a 9-5 mon-fri career (could go 8-4 in my current job) so it seems if we have children they will grow up knowing who mum and dad are, but many children hardly get to see there parents these days as there parents both have to work constantly to provide for them.

Its quite sad really and the damage to society is starting to show.

I think that prices did get out of hand and are still to high but as my figures show property has been almost as high before and contrary to what a lot of people seem to believe it was not always possible to buy and live on a single income. In the 70s my wife had various part time jobs ranging from office cleaning to bar work.

BigAunty

Generally, society has lost in the ups and downs of the property boom and bust cycle.

Social housing has been decimated because of the culture of ownership that was promoted.

So we have hardly any social housing left and it has been ghettoised as its allocation is now based on need so mainly only the deprived and ultra needy get a tenancy.

The shortage of social housing and tensions around immigration meant that housing has become a racialised topic and the BNP started to thrive on the back of this.

Population/household growth has increased far higher than the rate of house building. Numerous factors mean that the unskilled and unqualified, who in the past could have expected full time permanent employment, are lucky if they get part time temporary jobs at all and are mainly stuck in private housing whose rents far exceed what they can earn to pay it. This means the tax payer picks up a huge LHA and HB bill.

There are many property 'winners' but their children will not necessarily benefit from it and we now have a huge under-class in the country who largely live in rental properties, the majority of which aren't of a great standard.

atush

CRASH_BANG_WALLOP wrote: »

dude how many 20 somethings do you see on escape to the country

as a first time buyer, I bought a 5 bed barn conversion. I was in my 30's, and I had to convert the barn myself to afford it :beer:

Pimperne1

Percy1983 wrote: »

I can see the biggest problem now is many don't have a choice to stay home with children as 2 incomes are needed to keep the house for said children.

As it is we are quite lucky in the sense my other half works in school so school holidays aren't a problem and I have a 9-5 mon-fri career (could go 8-4 in my current job) so it seems if we have children they will grow up knowing who mum and dad are, but many children hardly get to see there parents these days as there parents both have to work constantly to provide for them.

Its quite sad really and the damage to society is starting to show.

I think some females might take issue with this. They are not going out to work just to finance a house they are going out to work because they are equal to men and why should they stay at home.

Percy1983

Pimperne1 wrote: »

I think some females might take issue with this. They are not going out to work just to finance a house they are going out to work because they are equal to men and why should they stay at home.

I never said the women had to be the one to stay home, the male could stay home or it could be 2 part time jobs.

The point is yes some couples may work because they want to, but how many couples would cuts hours to spend more time with there children if it was an option.