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!
How can we get the housing market moving?
Comments
-
first time buyer chart..
what should also be noted about that chart is that the UK population when something like this:
1970s - 55 million
2000 - 58 million
2011 - 63 million
the increase since 2000 was fuelled largely by adult immigration. so, the graph is not "inflation adjusted". it would look even more pronounced if it was.0 -
Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »No what you said 'all along' was that banks "were not prepared to lend because house prices were too high", which is patently untrue and what's more, you know it is. The fact that you are now ducking and diving bares tribute to this.
No response. What's that thing shortchanged and graham say about hamish, something about 'ghosting' when he's proven wrong?
How deliciously hypocritical.
0 -
Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »No response. What's that thing shortchanged and graham say about hamish, something about 'ghosting' when he's proven wrong?
How deliciously hypocritical.
Renoman you've already been banned so why don't you just ghost off elsewhere.
0 -
Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »No what you said 'all along' was that banks "were not prepared to lend because house prices were too high", which is patently untrue and what's more, you know it is. The fact that you are now ducking and diving bares tribute to this.shortchanged wrote: »Renoman you've already been banned so why don't you just ghost off elsewhere.
More ducking and diving. Anyone with any credibility would either argue the point in hand or simply admit that they were wrapping up their own opinion as fact and had been caught out.
If you come on this forum to debate, then please debate. If you just want to make statements and not have them questioned, then perhaps you should go to the HPC forum?0 -
Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »More ducking and diving. Anyone with any credibility would either argue the point in hand or simply admit that they were wrapping up their own opinion as fact and had been caught out.
If you come on this forum to debate, then please debate. If you just want to make statements and not have them questioned, then perhaps you should go to the HPC forum?
Please explain how I am ducking and diving. I have said what I have said and I have stated I stick by what I said, so how exactly is that ducking and diving?
I believe now although I may be right or wrong, that the banks are unwilling to lend becasue house prices are too high and I base this on the evidence of very low transaction levels, particularly to FTB's.
Is that alright for you now renoman? Or am I going to have to go back to repeating myself over and over and over and over again.0 -
shortchanged wrote: »Please explain how I am ducking and diving. I have said what I have said and I have stated I stick by what I said, so how exactly is that ducking and diving?
I believe now although I may be right or wrong, that the banks are unwilling to lend becasue house prices are too high and I base this on the evidence of very low transaction levels, particularly to FTB's.
Is that alright for you now Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu? Or am I going to have to go back to repeating myself over and over and over and over again.
No that's perfectly fine, you changed from stating a fact to admitting you are stating an opinion (which you've said may be right or wrong). That's all I wanted you to do, so we can now go on with our lives. 0 -
We haven't even seen the effect of £60K student debts on the first time buyer housing market.
That will only be properly felt in about 10 years time.
On the question of immigration, this is bound to reduce overall levels of home ownership as immigrants are often starting from scratch, without the benefit of existing savings, parental help or inheritance from existing home owner relatives. The tendancy to have larger families also decreases the potential for parents to help with deposits further down the line.
This is not to say that a reduced levels of home ownership is bad, as long as rentable housing is available at affordable prices.
If Keynesianism is any form of answer to our current economic problems, then building homes for our expanding population would be a good place to start. But I suggest that the state keeps its some form of control.
Thatcher's property owning democracy was probably a mirage.
The state will need plenty of homes to provide when increasing numbers of people reach retirement in relative poverty. Otherwise it will just be subsidising landlordism via the benefits system in 2040 onwards.0 -
House prices are still too high. Until houses cost reasonable levels people wont buy...0
-
shortchanged wrote: »Is that alright for you now renoman?
Mmmmm, I did wonder. If it is our old "friend" RM, he seems to have come back with a slightly different, and in my opinion, better attitude. I`ve very much agreed with a few of the things he's typed, although there have been a few things that made me suspect that it might be our old pal.30 Year Challenge : To be 30 years older. Equity : Don't know, don't care much. Savings : That's asking for ridicule.0 -
Mmmmm, I did wonder. If it is our old "friend" RM, he seems to have come back with a slightly different, and in my opinion, better attitude. I`ve very much agreed with a few of the things he's typed, although there have been a few things that made me suspect that it might be our old pal.
No I think he was only out to deceive, i.e not give the game away too easily that it was him. I spotted it within a few postings of his new user name.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards