House Prices "Heavily Undervalued" says Times article

Mallotum_X

chucky wrote: »

Another one to add to the Ignore list who has nothing to say about the thread and only about another forum user.

Intelligent debate on his forum is seen less and less now.

Oh the irony...

OffGridLiving

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

You tend to resort to ad hominems when you are frustrated that prices are rising.

Never mind Shorty, prices will fall again in another 15 or 20 years.;)

I've noticed that too. smallchanged seems to get rattled by these sorts of news stories and then tried to disrupt the debate. It's the internet version of a child putting its fingers into its ears and shouting 'nahnahnahnahnah' when it doesn't want to hear something.

Bit poor really, especially on a financial debating forum. If s/he doesn't want to discuss the topics, then why bother logging on?

N1AK

92203 wrote: »

Yet again, you seem to be positively rejoicing in the fact that the basic need of shelter is becoming more expensive for those less fortunate than you.

I can't recall seeing Hamish saying he is against more house building. In fact I'm pretty sure he's in favour of it.

His point, and it is a fair one, is that we aren't building houses; whether we 'should' or not is fine for debate, but we aren't. The previous property crash was because prices were in a bubble and it burst when confidence in the economy fell. House prices now, in real terms, are considerably lower than at the peak of the previous bubble. Houses are still over-priced but that is because of under-supply now rather than investment speculation. The depressing part is that this is likely, and imo already is, leading us into another bubble. If I had to guess then I'd guess that anyone buying in the next 12 months will be fine (London being especially hard to judge) but if the bubble continues we will end up with another huge property value bubble and crash.

shortchanged_2

N1AK wrote: »

I can't recall seeing Hamish saying he is against more house building. In fact I'm pretty sure he's in favour of it.

His point, and it is a fair one, is that we aren't building houses; whether we 'should' or not is fine for debate, but we aren't. The previous property crash was because prices were in a bubble and it burst when confidence in the economy fell. House prices now, in real terms, are considerably lower than at the peak of the previous bubble. Houses are still over-priced but that is because of under-supply now rather than investment speculation. The depressing part is that this is likely, and imo already is, leading us into another bubble. If I had to guess then I'd guess that anyone buying in the next 12 months will be fine (London being especially hard to judge) but if the bubble continues we will end up with another huge property value bubble and crash.

Hamish doesn't want more houses built. He pretends he does in fake sympathy for FTB'ers etc.

Do you think that someone who so openly cheers on rising house prices really wants a measure that would essentially push prices down?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

shortchanged wrote: »

Hamish doesn't want more houses built. He pretends he does in fake sympathy for FTB'ers etc.

Do you think that someone who so openly cheers on rising house prices really wants a measure that would essentially push prices down?

Again with the ad hominems....

What is it with you and rising house prices?

Anyway....

You quite literally couldn't build enough houses now to push prices down over the next 15-20 years.

It's far too late for that.

Thanks primarily to the very mortgage rationing you cheered on for the last 5 years causing building to drop to 100 year lows.

But that doesn't change the fact that there is a housing crisis, and this country needs vast numbers of new houses. Several million over the next decade.

So build away, we desperately need the houses, and whilst it certainly won't cause prices to fall, it may at least keep price rises within reason.

abaxas

shortchanged_2

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

What is it with you and rising house prices?

Because there has never been a proper correction in house prices so property is still overpriced and is sucking away peoples other living funds.

Why is there this obsession with rising prices when prices are already expensive?
Property is what it is. It should be somewhere for people to live in not seen as some money making cash cow.

Is this a good thing Hamish.....http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/jan/04/housing-costs-tenants-homeowners-payday-loans

CLAPTON

shortchanged wrote: »

Because there has never been a proper correction in house prices so property is still overpriced and is sucking away peoples other living funds.

Why is there this obsession with rising prices when prices are already expensive?
Property is what it is. It should be somewhere for people to live in not seen as some money making cash cow.

Is this a good thing Hamish.....http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/jan/04/housing-costs-tenants-homeowners-payday-loans

what ever is a 'proper correction in house prices'?


the price of houses is determined by the balance of effective demand and effective supply

shortchanged_2

CLAPTON wrote: »

what ever is a 'proper correction in house prices'?


the price of houses is determined by the balance of effective demand and effective supply

Yes in a free market, but we are not in a free housing market.

All the various schemes and helping hands are testament to that.

chucky

shortchanged wrote: »

Because there has never been a proper correction in house prices so property is still overpriced and is sucking away peoples other living funds.

Why is there this obsession with rising prices when prices are already expensive?
Property is what it is. It should be somewhere for people to live in not seen as some money making cash cow.

Property has always been expensive.

Is it overpriced? No I don't think so, if it was there would be nobody buying property.