Toughest squeeze on living standards since 1920

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

you could probably make £200 to £400 a month by moving your kids in with you and letting out your spare room that should help you.

It's still demand being taken away from other houses, whichever way you go about it.

And to tackle the problem outlined in the OP, this would have to be done on a national scale by the people with issues, not just a couple of families.

If families started living together en masse to carry out your suggestion, firstly, there would be less people needing to lodge, and secondly, less people needing to buy and rent.

Values would fall, negative equity would rise. There are no two ways about it. You can't just change the way we live on masse without it having huge consequences to the finances of not only the country (council tax revenues etc) but also the finances of those families setup for todays living standards (having mortgages etc on a falling asset).

I'm not being silly about it all, you are just suggesting the article isn't really worth taking any notice of as a family could do x,y and z. But you are not extrapolating that over the country and taking into account the consequences.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's still demand being taken away from other houses, whichever way you go about it.

And to tackle the problem outlined in the OP, this would have to be done on a national scale by the people with issues, not just a couple of families.

If families started living together en masse to carry out your suggestion, firstly, there would be less people needing to lodge, and secondly, less people needing to buy and rent.

Values would fall, negative equity would rise. There are no two ways about it. You can't just change the way we live on masse without it having huge consequences to the finances of not only the country (council tax revenues etc) but also the finances of those families setup for todays living standards (having mortgages etc on a falling asset).

I'm not being silly about it all, you are just suggesting the article isn't really worth taking any notice of as a family could do x,y and z. But you are not extrapolating that over the country and taking into account the consequences.

I know you sit there looking for reason for property prices to fall and they may well fall I don’t pretend to know what will happen. But basically all this is saying is that wages haven’t kept up with inflation. It’s not just property prices that correct when we have a crash and it is always the least well off that suffer the most. I am probably among the people with the lowest income on this group and I am managing reasonable well.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

I know you sit there looking for reason for property prices to fall and they may well fall I don’t pretend to know what will happen.

This isn't anything to do with that. You gave me a simple (too simple) suggestion, and I commented that it would make finances worse, due to less demand for houses, meaning negative equity etc.

I commented directly on your suggestions, as you well know. So don't know why you are making out I saw this news article and thought "property prices to fall", as I didn't.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

This isn't anything to do with that. You gave me a simple (too simple) suggestion, and I commented that it would make finances worse, due to less demand for houses, meaning negative equity etc.

I commented directly on your suggestions, as you well know. So don't know why you are making out I saw this news article and thought "property prices to fall", as I didn't.

If prices don't fall why would there be more negative equity.

i'm old enough to have been through a couple of recessions and this one does look like its shaping up to be the worse but when the crunch comes in order to kept a roof over thier heads most people have cut back to the basics whether this will happen this I don't know.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

If prices don't fall why would there be more negative equity.

I'm giving up now, but for clarity, it was in response to your suggestion that people could pool finances and move in together, take in lodger etc.

In doing that, you are removing the demand for houses. People would need to sell up, and lots of people, meaning reduced prices. People would stop renting BTL's investments, meaning lower prices etc.

If you compare how the nation lived in the 20's, and suggest people could do it again to improve finances, that's fine, I agree, but it would have a huge knock on effect to current infrastructure and tax take.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm giving up now, but for clarity, it was in response to your suggestion that people could pool finances and move in together, take in lodger etc.

In doing that, you are removing the demand for houses. People would need to sell up, and lots of people, meaning reduced prices. People would stop renting BTL's investments, meaning lower prices etc.

If you compare how the nation lived in the 20's, and suggest people could do it again to improve finances, that's fine, I agree, but it would have a huge knock on effect to current infrastructure and tax take.

I obviously wasn’t seriously suggesting we should go back to the 20s or move kids in with mum and dad. But it is easier to make saving from the standard of living we have now compared to the 20s and comparisons to almost 20 years ago are not very useful.

If people havent got the money the tax take will be down anyway.
　

　

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Seems living standards (however they are measured) are at the lowest since the 1920s, as the average person spendd 3 hours a week fretting over finances.

Apart from the 'hours spent fretting over finances' index is there any evidence that living standards are as low as they've been since the 1920's?

Come on Graham - turn on your BS filter.

undetterred

Never mind graham.We have our iPhones,superdry t shirts an notes on the !!!! to cheer us

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Apart from the 'hours spent fretting over finances' index is there any evidence that living standards are as low as they've been since the 1920's?

Come on Graham - turn on your BS filter.

Well, apart from the fact that were now in the deepest double dip recession for 50 years....no, nothing at all that could even hint at problems for people.

Thanks again wotsthat, everything is rosy again.

PasturesNew

ukcarper wrote: »

you could probably make £200 to £400 a month by moving your kids in with you and letting out your spare room that should help you.

I had a "posh" friend some years back... posh meant 3-bedroom new build detached house with garage in a desirable village.

She wanted extra money (to fund her constant expensive hair-dos, expensive shoes and new Escort cabriolet)... so she registered with two companies to take in furren students. Trouble was, they both called her - and she was too scared to tell them she was registered with others, so she took in two sets. Her/husband put their kids into their bed and they slept on the living room floor for 2 weeks.