Where have I gone wrong?

Guy_Montag

sortofok wrote: »

Good morning Guy. did you sleep well.

As well as can be expected in my rented accommodation

Why? *narrows eyes suspiciously*

maninthestreet

".... I'm stuck in a house that I only own about 70% of; the remainder belongs to Britannia. I can't even look forward to the inevitable house price crash. It seems that I bought too early."


When did you buy the house, 14 years ago, or was it more than that?
How much did you pay for it, and how much is it worth now?
Owning 70% of your house isn't a bad thing - better than only owning only
30% of it.

Melissa177

kingkano wrote: »

How many people are on average wage? How many of those require an 'average' price house from scratch? Seriously I find this argument touted out everytime as ridiculous. The world doesnt work on averages!!!

Also, how far back do you really have to go to find the point in time that a single average wage earner could buy an average house? My research says it must be the 60s maybe earlier. My grandparents just about remember it happening like this....

I think you'll find since then that you've needed 2 incomes to comfortably afford an 'average' house. Otherwise single people can buy a flat (alot less than average) or rent (best thing for single people surely!)

I agree with Kingkano.

Also, the term "average" is misleading, because for both salaries and house prices, the scale is distorted by people at either end who earn an awful lot of money, or obscenely expensive houses.

I would be very interested to know where the median house price is on the UK house price range (which extends from 10K up to about 40 million)

mr.broderick

meanmachine wrote: »

Oh not this again.

Average wage: 23K
Average house 200K

Average price of ipod: 90quid

Number of ipods I would need to buy for this tired, tedious baby boomer argument to have any basis in logic: 2,345.

Poor baby boomers having to buy a property now valued at 400K for 40K.

Aah diddums. Give me a high inflation environment any day.

You can see his point though cant you?! I agree with GG on most things and I agree with this. Just noticed meanmachine is an anagram of Ahem! Nice man. Are you a nice man mean machine?:p

mr.broderick

Guy_Montag wrote: »

As well as can be expected in my rented accommodation

Why? *narrows eyes suspiciously*

Guy montag..i like your name...you are "not gay mug" are you?

Guy_Montag

Melissa177 wrote: »

I agree with Kingkano.

Also, the term "average" is misleading, because for both salaries and house prices, the scale is distorted by people at either end who earn an awful lot of money, or obscenely expensive houses.

I would be very interested to know where the median house price is on the UK house price range (which extends from 10K up to about 40 million)

Where can I get a house for £10k on this island these days? I mean something livable, I've seen burned out shells for about £30-40k in the sort of areas where empty houses get set on fire.

My guess is Halifax or Nationwide give a pretty good average, the cheapest properties being bought by "investors" & the most expensive bought by people who don't need a mortgage.

jodenice

Guy_Montag wrote: »

(surely a sack, a rock & enough petrol to the nearest bridge aren't that expensive?*) ".

GASP!!!!!!! *covers ears of small dog closeby. _pale_

nelly_2

kingkano wrote: »

Which then comes back to what gorgeous george first pointed out. the amazing amount of 'tosh' that people spend their money on compared to back then! meanmaching took just the ipod for his example.... he forgot to include - mobile phone @ £35pm, sky tv @ £50pm, broadband internet @ £25pm, gadgets and crap could easily total 1k pa for some people, 3 nights a week out clubbing with friends.... who knows.... holidays (luxury holidays!) abroad etc etc etc

Although we complain how expensive house prices are, my grandparents still seemed to have a much harder life then people now, had less disposable money leftover.... yet obviously house prices were so much better compared to wages?? I dont understand that bit.

So what your saying is we have bettered our standard of living and earn more, so house prices have to be far more expensive just to p1ss us off again?

Whats wrong with really cheap houses and loads of hollidays?

Whats right with people STILL have to stretch themselves like your grand parents. It makes far more sense for houses to be cheap so we can spend more money on fun stuff, eating out more often, haveing a nice car rather than a banger etc etc

poppy10_2

Guy_Montag wrote: »

pet insurance (surely a sack, a rock & enough petrol to the nearest bridge aren't that expensive?*)

Classic line :rotfl: :T

It is funny how many of the supposedly "debt-free wannabees" waste their money on such things.

kingkano

nelly wrote: »

So what your saying is we have bettered our standard of living and earn more, so house prices have to be far more expensive just to p1ss us off again?

Whats wrong with really cheap houses and loads of hollidays?

Whats right with people STILL have to stretch themselves like your grand parents. It makes far more sense for houses to be cheap so we can spend more money on fun stuff, eating out more often, haveing a nice car rather than a banger etc etc

Since everyone else is using history to justify their beliefs, I was just giving the other side of the coin.....

So we earn more and have more tosh, better standard of living, you think house prices should buck this and be cheaper than ever before??

I agree, it'd be nice to have all these things. Its about balance. You can't have them ALL. I know some people pop out for a £100 meal for the family, go home in an 06 model car to watch sky on a 46" plasma, while the mrs packs for a £5k holiday in maldives or somesuch. But they say look at the apalling house prices compared to my salary???

I do know this doesnt apply to everyone though I just like a good debate lol. I think thats the thing with most of these threads!