House Prices +10% YoY in next few months?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

nickj wrote: »

will we ever learn?

Well, at least we finally seem to have learned you can't solve a housing shortage with mortgage rationing. That just drives house building to 100 year lows and sends rents soaring to record highs.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Well, at least we finally seem to have learned you can't solve a housing shortage with mortgage rationing. That just drives house building to 100 year lows and sends rents soaring to record highs.

So it's better, in your world, to still have building at record lows, but drive up house prices aswell as rental prices?

Really clever that!

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So it's better, in your world, to still have building at record lows, but drive up house prices aswell as rental prices?

Really clever that!

Of course it's better.

As the price response will increase supply.

In fact, it's already happening....

"There are signs that supply is beginning to respond to the pick-up in demand, which if continued should help to constrain the upward pressure on prices.

The recent strengthening in house prices is increasing the amount of equity that many homeowners have in their home, enabling more to put their property on the market for sale.

Levels of housebuilding are also increasing, albeit from a very low base"

http://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/media1/press_releases/2013_press_releases/halifax/0310_HPI.asp

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Of course it's better.

As the price response will increase supply.

In fact, it's already happening....

LOL.

Supply will not keep pace with even a small portion of the demand bought forward by interference.

Though I have to say, I find it truly astonishing that you think higher rentals and low building is bad,....

...but so long as house prices rise, what was bad, is now good.

Dearie me Hamish.

THE_MASKED_TURNIP

After an early stabilising start to the year since Spring prices have been surging upwards. Many of us forewarned that the best time to buy was before then. But would the goons listen?

Loughton_Monkey

Graham_Devon wrote: »

.....Supply will not keep pace with even a small portion of the demand bought forward by interference...

An alternative would be to make mortgages so much more difficult again. Ration them again. To a point where demand for houses was so low as to match the derisory small supply of building. Then what? Government build more houses that wouldn't sell?

What I find interesting, though, is how it will pan out for renters. We now see more houses coming on stream, together with more mortgage funds available thanks to HTB.

We have already heard that houses are being snapped up the minute they come on the market. Ask yourself who is in a position to get a solid offer in on a house first? The first time buyer who has stayed at home, is saving up, and these couples are now queuing up to buy? Or those who have made a lifestyle choice to pay the landlord's mortgage by renting. I wonder if the latter constituency will miss the boat again?

Graham_Devon

They very fact that you describe those renting as having made a "lifestyle choice" proves you haven't got a clue what's actually going on.

What do you think happened to these people? They had cash in the bank, all ready to buy, but made a lifestyle choice to rent instead?

People rent, in the main, because they cannot afford to buy. It's therefore little surprise that they will "miss the boat".

I just do not get this mindset so many of you have. Why on earth do you assume people all make a decision of "to buy or not to buy"? The money required seems to pass you by. This pretence, while making out you are highly intellectual, is just bizzare.

ruggedtoast

Graham_Devon wrote: »

They very fact that you describe those renting as having made a "lifestyle choice" proves you haven't got a clue what's actually going on.

What do you think happened to these people? They had cash in the bank, all ready to buy, but made a lifestyle choice to rent instead?

People rent, in the main, because they cannot afford to buy. It's therefore little surprise that they will "miss the boat".

I just do not get this mindset so many of you have. Why on earth do you assume people all make a decision of "to buy or not to buy"? The money required seems to pass you by. This pretence, while making out you are highly intellectual, is just bizzare.

We've been through all this with them though Graham. Many times. There is nothing that will convince them that house prices are any higher in real terms now than they were in times gone by.

I have had exactly this argument with the same posters. I ended up posting a series of information from the Land Registry, the Office of National Statistics and god knows what else proving that housing is two to three times more expensive in real terms than it was in the 70s. They all went quiet and stopped posting on the thread and then just pop up again like Bobo dolls later on, trumpeting the same fallacy that was debunked earlier.

No amount of evidence, raw data, pictographic representation or anecdotal argument will change someone's mind once he has made the decision to ignore reason in favour of what he wants to believe.

There is simply no point going over a fact on here any more which is almost universally accepted by virtually everyone I have ever met in the entire UK, apart from about ten people who all post here.

ruggedtoast

THE_MASKED_TURNIP wrote: »

After an early stabilising start to the year since Spring prices have been surging upwards. Many of us forewarned that the best time to buy was before then. But would the goons listen?

I have had a look 'over there'. They are unrepentant. They are predicting the big crash is just around the corner. They are quietly confident.

Loughton_Monkey

Graham_Devon wrote: »

.....People rent, in the main, because they cannot afford to buy. It's therefore little surprise that they will "miss the boat".

I just do not get this mindset so many of you have. Why on earth do you assume people all make a decision of "to buy or not to buy"? The money required seems to pass you by. This pretence, while making out you are highly intellectual, is just bizzare.

I was clearly referring to those renters with the income that would support a mortgage if only they saved the deposit, and not to people with low incomes who could never dream of buying a house.

And for these particular renters, of which I believe there are many, if it is not a 'lifestyle choice' then I don't know what is. Do you know anyone who is renting 'by accident'? They must have rented for the first time at some stage. If they didn't consider buying - even for 2 minutes - then that's still a lifestyle choice. I personally believe 'inactivity' to be a 'lifestyle choice' - such as those people who put money in a Cash ISA at 3% and then 'forget' about it dropping to 0.1%, and simply leave it there even though they could still get 2% by moving it. Losing 1.9% interest is a 'choice'.

When I got married, I was 'forced' to rent since I was at university and couldn't possibly buy. But we rented cheap and once I was in employment, I made a 'lifestyle choice' to buy as soon as I could. Alongside that, I deliberately decided not to move to a "decent" rented house since it would have hindered that rate at which I could save. I cannot believe anyone in that situation would have never even discussed such a possibility, or simply had children (lifestyle choice) and moved up to a better rented house, without any thoughts whatsoever of if/when buying might be a possibility.