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!
Who'd vote for lower house prices? Not many...

Turnbull2000
Posts: 1,807 Forumite
http://henrypryor.com/blog/2012/10/the-idle-guide-to-making-money/
Back in 1997 my wife bought a pretty little two bed flat in Battersea. According to the Land Registry she paid £148,000. Why this information should be publicly available I’m not sure but it is and so is the fact that having spent about £10k on it in 2000 she sold it for £190,000 and five years latter in 2005 it sold for £290,000. A 52% increase over five years.
The same flat with little change is now under offer at around John D Wood’s guide of £550k, a further 90% increase since 2005.
In the short terms there might be pain for some away from London & the South East and whilst it may make little sense to many on balance I suspect that house prices will, in general terms, continue to rise. It isn’t much fun being a politician if they don’t allow this to happen and it costs them little (today) to give the majority of electorate such a warm glow.
Who’s going to vote for lower house prices and more importantly which party would they vote for? Like Christmas voting turkeys most people will put their cross next to the party who won’t destroy the value they think they have in their home. That includes a “no” to building more new homes or letting prices slide even if it will allow their kids to buy.
Hi, we’ve had to remove your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam
0
Comments
-
And more stating the obvious...
http://henrypryor.com/blog/2012/10/which-party-will-sort-out-housing/The truth is that none of the Parties wants to talk about the problems with housing. Solving it requires building (some) more new homes, spending money we don’t have and risking upsetting people who live in an age that most of us left behind in the last century. If you need votes to get elected then it isn’t a great idea to p*ss off the very people whose votes you are after.
There are many who think that infrastructure – encouraging people to move away from the expensive, congested South East, homes – or the lack of affordable housing and keeping the lights on should dominate the debate in the run up to the next election. But since progress on any of these pressing topics require leadership – by which I mean the ability to sell an unpopular idea to a NIMBY electorate then judging by the 2012 party conferences we are unlikely to find any politician who has a view let alone a back bone and the courage to suggest an possible answer.Hi, we’ve had to remove your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam0 -
That does assume only homeowners vote. At the point where there are more wannabes than owners the balance could change.0
-
I can't understand why he gets soooo excited about prices in London and the SE, when he's living in some Northern dump with his relations!0
-
Who'd vote for lower house prices? Not many...0
-
Who'd vote for lower house prices?
Parents who would like to see their children have a chance of getting on the housing ladder and not be burdened by a massive mortgage debt.0 -
For those who have bought a house as a home, a price fall should not be a problem unless it pushes them into negative equity.
For those trying to either get onto or move up the ladder, a fall in prices should be positively welcomed as it makes the next step easier to reach.
For those who want their children to have the chance of stability in adult life a fall in house prices is a must.
For those who view houses as an investment, a fall in prices would be a much needed reality check."When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson0 -
That does assume only homeowners vote. At the point where there are more wannabes than owners the balance could change.
When do you envisage that will be?
I'm assuming there would need to be a huge increase in population to counter the number of homeowners the UK have.
Then you have a quandry that there is more potential demand than the available supply.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
MacMickster wrote: »For those who have bought a house as a home, a price fall should not be a problem unless it pushes them into negative equity.
For those trying to either get onto or move up the ladder, a fall in prices should be positively welcomed as it makes the next step easier to reach.
For those who want their children to have the chance of stability in adult life a fall in house prices is a must.
For those who view houses as an investment, a fall in prices would be a much needed reality check.
All true, but sadly the message "HPI = Good" overrides logic and common sense. New Labour knew and relied on this, and used it to good effect until those naughty Americans ruined their plan.30 Year Challenge : To be 30 years older. Equity : Don't know, don't care much. Savings : That's asking for ridicule.0 -
MacMickster wrote: »For those who have bought a house as a home, a price fall should not be a problem unless it pushes them into negative equity.
TrueMacMickster wrote: »For those trying to either get onto or move up the ladder, a fall in prices should be positively welcomed as it makes the next step easier to reach.
True, assuming you get a buyer for your home.
We recently sold our property.
Marketted locally at 16:00 on a Friday, call at 18:00, viewed at 10:00 on the Saturday and offer received by 12:00 on the Monday.
Conversely, we offered on a property that had been on the market for 6 months (6.4% under the asking price). Rejected
We upped our offer to 3.2% under the asking price. Also rejected. We walked away to build our own home and the property has been taken off the market (not sold)
In a falling market, potential buyers reduce which means you may have less opportunity to sell upMacMickster wrote: »For those who want their children to have the chance of stability in adult life a fall in house prices is a must.
False.
I've assessed the market place and consider that long term house prices are likely to be far higher when my children are looking to buy than they are now.
What I have therefore done is take measures to secure my childrens future if this were to happen by investing in property now.
If prices drop, then it's easier for them, if not then I've hedges against price increases for them.
Main point is that it is human nature and natural to want to provide for your family
If you pick your head up and look further ahead, your likely to be able to circumnavigate the obstacles that come in your path.MacMickster wrote: »For those who view houses as an investment, a fall in prices would be a much needed reality check.
No need for a reality check.
Investors know (or at least any sensible ones do) house prices can go up or down.
I've not monitores any market when there is an absolute linear increase month on month.
Historically, long term the outcome is increases and in the last 30 or so years, this has outstripped inflation by approx 2.9% year on year.
Not a fantastic return for investors, but a substantially more stable one than shares:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
I'd vote for lower house prices. I'd be happy if mine were worth the same as i bought it for in '96, after all its the same house only older?? The rate they go up is crazy - people now need more for a deposit than my whole house cost, how can this be sane?
Why do houses gain in value, yet cars dont (generally)? They both get older, both need maintenance etc. Surely the cost of land is not that much of a factor??0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards