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!
Will they ever learn?
Comments
-
-
- Millions of homes built in the early part of last century and onwards were council homes, agricultural tied cottages and so on. Housing subsidy is nothing new.
- 95% mortgages have been around since the 1980's and me and millions like me managed perfectly well to sustain them.
Says a man who was a huge fan of "Liar Loans" and openly admitted to it on this website or are there 2 mortgage advisors called Conrad?.
You encouraged people to "massage" their earnings with regards to income multiples when applying for mortgages.
Historically speaking your part of the problem Conrad, mortgage advisors like you advising buyers to lie about income.
Did you lie about your income to get your own mortgage Conrad?
You have a very short memory .0 -
You're actually quite wrong.
A lot of people are ready to make a financial commitment but what they lack is capital which is not easy to come by in this day and age.
Whereas there was some mysterious "day and age" when it was easy to lay your hands on large sums?I will use my example to show you what I mean. Me an my wife have a joint income of £50k with no dependents. We have been renting for a few years and have been paying in the range of £700-£800 per month on rent alone. We live a very fulfilling and enjoyable life.
Joint income £50k gross. If you earn half each, that would be about £39,700 net per year, or £3,303 a month. Using what are probably over-estimates, you might spend on necessities:
Rent - 800
C Tax - 150
other bills - 300
travel to work etc - 250
food etc - 300
total - £1,800
that leaves you with more than £1.5k / month left over. Say you spend £500 of that on holidays / cars / meals out / drinking (and that's quite a bit to spend on some of those things!) you'd still have £1k a month in your savings.
So wtihout taxpayers' help, over the few years you've been renting, you could easily have saved £50k or so. Do you live in central London, so that this sort of sum is only a 5% + fees deposit?
Do you not think it is better that we own a home and pay the mortgage on it rather then pay it for someone else by renting (not to forget extortionate letting agency fees etc)?
The question isn't, to my mind, whether it's "better", but who should be paying for the better-ness!...much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
leveller2911 wrote: »And there lies the problem. Can you explain why "house prices" rising helps Society/Government long term ?. Earnings will never compare with the cost of houses in the UK until we have a house price correction.It will be painful for some/many but until a Government grows a pair of balls and stop fudging the issue sooner or later they will run out of bullets and then have no options but to let the market fall.
As for a "potential" good return can you post a few examples of where the Government have recieved a "good return" from gambling taxpayers money.. I can't see many of the banks that were bailed out giving the taxpayers a good return on our investments anytime soon.
Your plan is nothing more than greed and a gamble. I will be alright Jack , f*ck the next generation.
The fact is that if the house prices keep rising with every year that passes house buying will be even further out of reach for the average person and the problem compounded.
The last post makes your post highly contradictory.
Firstly you ask when the government has received a good return and then say house prices will rise (which will mean a return on their 20% investment plus any interest accumulated in each house!)
Secondly you have a problem with the government giving the average person a chance to buy a property now by giving them an equity then you say that the price rise will make it difficult/impossible for the average person to buy a house.
Do you people read what you write?neverdespairgirl wrote: »Whereas there was some mysterious "day and age" when it was easy to lay your hands on large sums?
Joint income £50k gross. If you earn half each, that would be about £39,700 net per year, or £3,303 a month. Using what are probably over-estimates, you might spend on necessities:
Rent - 800
C Tax - 150
other bills - 300
travel to work etc - 250
food etc - 300
total - £1,800
that leaves you with more than £1.5k / month left over. Say you spend £500 of that on holidays / cars / meals out / drinking (and that's quite a bit to spend on some of those things!) you'd still have £1k a month in your savings.
So wtihout taxpayers' help, over the few years you've been renting, you could easily have saved £50k or so. Do you live in central London, so that this sort of sum is only a 5% + fees deposit?
The question isn't, to my mind, whether it's "better", but who should be paying for the better-ness!
I don't know in which Universe you spend £10 a day on food but yea sure.
Also while not following the conversation you have missed that we've only been on this income for 14 months and in that time we have paid all credit cards and other debts accumulated while putting ourselves through school without any help from the taxpayers (like a lot of you judging souls most likely have had) and also saved a good amount to put towards our 5-10% deposit.
Furthermore I have also said that I would not like to spend £40000 in the next 5 years on rent while saving for a deposit when I can easily put that towards my mortgage.
I've been working hard enough, there's part of my money in that pot too!0 -
I guess the carrots government offers will increase the price of property and encourage development of new housing and redevelopment of old housing. This will increase employment in construction.
I am not sure this is a bad idea. I mean it may be crowding out other sectors, but so what?0 -
I don't know in which Universe you spend £10 a day on food but yea sure.
How much do you spend for two people?
You have done well so far to clear credit cards and save £7k. keep going like people have always had to do.
There are many more things government should be doing than making large efforts propping up house prices. If they want to prop up the builders get some affordable social housebuilding going.
If they are so hell bent on providing 95% mortgages for new builds get the buyer to purchase an insurance backed private sector indemnity policy preferably paid for upfront.
For new builds just think where that 5% deposit you have raised goes.
Whilst rates continue to be held down lots of others are suffering."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
I'd much rather the government offered loans to individuals who want to build a life and provide security for themselves and their families, than give handouts to lazy scroungers who abuse the welfare system, can't be bothered to make any positive contribution in society and rely on welfare payments to fund drug habits, petty crime and pro-create on an industrial scale.0
-
Radiantsoul wrote: »I think the debate board is probably a more appropriate place to post this sort of thing.
I'm new to the forums, but isn't this board called
Debate - House prices and the economy ?0 -
neverdespairgirl wrote: »Whereas there was some mysterious "day and age" when it was easy to lay your hands on large sums?
Joint income £50k gross. If you earn half each, that would be about £39,700 net per year, or £3,303 a month. Using what are probably over-estimates, you might spend on necessities:
Rent - 800
C Tax - 150
other bills - 300
travel to work etc - 250
food etc - 300
total - £1,800
that leaves you with more than £1.5k / month left over. Say you spend £500 of that on holidays / cars / meals out / drinking (and that's quite a bit to spend on some of those things!) you'd still have £1k a month in your savings.
So wtihout taxpayers' help, over the few years you've been renting, you could easily have saved £50k or so. Do you live in central London, so that this sort of sum is only a 5% + fees deposit?
The question isn't, to my mind, whether it's "better", but who should be paying for the better-ness!
Under estimates more like!
£250 per month travel for a couple? - my daughter pays nearly that for herself. So you could double that.
and £800 per month rent? In Local Authority housing maybe, but not in the private rented sector in London/Greater London0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards