Are home owners happy that prices rise and price out young

Norman_Castle

floridaman wrote: »

Do you people have a heart? Shouldn't owning a houses be a basic right

If you were a home owner what would you give up to help first time buyers?.
Owning a house is a basic right. Choose one you can afford.

ruggedtoast

I had what I thought was a substantial deposit, left the country for a few years and came back in 2005 to find my substantial deposit, that would have been 50% - 60% down was now only worth 1/3.

I then spent a few years wondering when the madness would end watching it drop to 1/4, even while I was adding to it.

Fortunately in the end it all worked out and I got very lucky with some job opportunities and also got a good discount off the place we did buy, which we love, but i dont envy anyone in that situation now.

zagfles

floridaman wrote: »

Do you people have a heart? Shouldn't owning a houses be a basic right

So what do you expect us to do about it? I own a house, but as it's something I need, I couldn't give a t*ss about it's value. I'm not going to benefit from any rise in its value because I need it to live in and so won't be selling it.

In fact I'd prefer prices to fall so that my kids can afford to move out in a few years, but I can't make that happen just because I own a house.

w00519772

I don't think anyone really wants house price rises. If you sell a house to move on then you have to buy at a higher price as well (your next house costs more). Everyone loses, not just first time buyers, though first time buyers like me are hit hard.

The only people who benefit are those at the top of the chain who are not buying and those who are selling without buying.

I am a first time buyer. I was in your position in 2007 when house prices were a lot higher. Work hard and save a deposit. If you do this then I am sure you will get there in the end.

I saw a house priced at £40,000 the other day. You would only need a deposit of: £2,000 and a salary of about £9,800 (at four times your salary) to buy this.

zagfles

w00519772 wrote: »

I don't think anyone really wants house price rises. If you sell a house to move on then you have to buy at a higher price as well (your next house costs more). Everyone loses, not just first time buyers, though first time buyers like me are hit hard.

The only people who benefit are those at the top of the chain who are not buying and those who are selling without buying.

Even those at the top of the chain like me (I'm never going to move upmarket) don't benefit unless they intend to move downmarket (inc abroad to somewhere with cheaper prices).

The other people who benefit are BTL'ers, and those already with property who stand to inherit a property.

But as you say a lot of people lose, even if they are too stupid to realise it.

One thing people can do to redress the balance in the property market is to reconsider fairness in inheritance. For instance I was talking to a neighbour in his 80's about his will. His wife had died recently, he has 3 daughters two of whom have 2 kids each, the other is childless. All 3 daughters have properties, bought in the 90's when prices were sensible. The grandchildren don't own property (at college/uni). We had a chat about the fair way to split his estate.

I suggested leaving his house direct to his grandkids in equal shares, and the rest of the money split between his daughters. But he thought that would terribly unfair to his childless daughter. So I asked him why he thought his childless daughter should gain from house price inflation when his grandkids will lose from it. He didn't have an answer, hopefully I gave him something to think about....

CLAPTON

zagfles wrote: »

Even those at the top of the chain like me (I'm never going to move upmarket) don't benefit unless they intend to move downmarket (inc abroad to somewhere with cheaper prices).

The other people who benefit are BTL'ers, and those already with property who stand to inherit a property.

But as you say a lot of people lose, even if they are too stupid to realise it.

One thing people can do to redress the balance in the property market is to reconsider fairness in inheritance. For instance I was talking to a neighbour in his 80's about his will. His wife had died recently, he has 3 daughters two of whom have 2 kids each, the other is childless. All 3 daughters have properties, bought in the 90's when prices were sensible. The grandchildren don't own property (at college/uni). We had a chat about the fair way to split his estate.

I suggested leaving his house direct to his grandkids in equal shares, and the rest of the money split between his daughters. But he thought that would terribly unfair to his childless daughter. So I asked him why he thought his childless daughter should gain from house price inflation when his grandkids will lose from it. He didn't have an answer, hopefully I gave him something to think about....

maybe he knows that children would see the unequal distribution of his estate as a lack of love for one child.

zagfles

CLAPTON wrote: »

maybe he knows that children would see the unequal distribution of his estate as a lack of love for one child.

Why? He'd be leaving his children exactly the same amount each. He'd be leaving his grandchildren his house, his children already have properties so they don't need to buy one.

What I would do in his situation would be more complicated, but would demonstrate my intentions have nothing to do with any preference but purely to do with what's fair.

I'd leave my kids the estimated value of my house at the time they bought their house upped by RPI inflation. I'd leave any remining property value to my grandkids. That would make clear that my only intention is to pass the benefits of HPI onto those will suffer because of HPI.

Obviously such a will would need properly nailing down so it's unambiguous. Such as stating the basis of the historic value or indeed the value itself, and inflation figures to be used.

floridaman

Current home owners are likely to have kids so they are connected to this mess weather they like it or not. I don't blame current home owners who own a home to live in but we should all protest against people who own a home to make money from - BTL should be taxed so high that it makes it unattractive

CLAPTON

floridaman wrote: »

Current home owners are likely to have kids so they are connected to this mess weather they like it or not. I don't blame current home owners who own a home to live in but we should all protest against people who own a home to make money from - BTL should be taxed so high that it makes it unattractive

think outside the box; just make it a criminal offence for anyone to pay rent and landlords will disappear overnight

thequant

I love HPI, cant get enough of it and want it to continue.


My reasons, just stretched myself to my max, bought a 4 bed house even though I only need one bedroom. The rest will lie fallow apart from the occasional guest.


I'm in London, so I will be benefit in 3 ways.


1) I plan to move out of the capital at some point so will be buying, somewhere cheaper and will benefit from the difference.


2) London prices are growing faster than the rest of the country thus increasing the gains from 1)


3) As I have bought somewhere way to big for myself, I will collect the difference when I downsize.


The average London property is now at £400k and is expected to reach £600k in 3-5 years.


So £200k profit for doing naff all, I wont be complaining anytime soon.


The Young ? Frack em