Are home owners happy that prices rise and price out young

ukcarper

92203 wrote: »

I was referring to the 1999-2013 comparison. I can't see anything about wages increasing by 4100%, though would expect them to have gone up quite significantly over the last 50 years due to decimalization and the hyper inflation of the 1970s. I would also expect to see a relative (in relation to wages) reduction in the cost of groceries and other consumables, due to improved manufacturing and farming methods, not to mention the benefits which mechanisation and automation have brought. With that point in mind, with the advancement of building, mass production and fabrication techniques and technology, why have housing costs been allowed to increase so much more in relation to wages?

If you look at the 1999 - 2013 comparison, wages are only up by 41%, while important things like bread and fuel etc have increased significantly more.

On that chart, housing is the worst offender!

RPI and Earnings increases have been roughly the same since 1999 and houses have run away but from a very low position. But remember we have gone through the worse financial crisis in 100 years. I do think house prices are to high but that's the way it is.

CLAPTON

CreditCrunchie wrote: »

For responsible tenants that would not be a problem.

we don't have a problem with responsible landlords

CLAPTON

CreditCrunchie wrote: »

sulphate wrote: »

Very true. I just wanted to point out though that high house prices don't just affect the young but all first time buyers regardless of their situation.

I'm not really sure what the answer is.

maybe build more houses?

[Deleted User]

Don't buy in the South East? Throughout the rest of the country there are loads of affordable houses.

I play the game of 'what could I buy in the north' occasionally. It is disgusting that I could sell up my 3 bed semi (I'm 33) north of London and buy a shiny detached 4 bed house with extension and brand new kitchen on my parents street t'up north. There are plenty of £100k starter homes round there too.

Guess what I did as soon as I payed off my student overdraft? Started saving for my deposit.

CreditCrunchie

CLAPTON wrote: »

we don't have a problem with responsible landlords

I beg to differ. Perhaps I was lucky in my first place, but over the last four years I have experienced nothing but bad landlords whose first concern is their pocket. Having read around the subject for various reasons (legal advice, forums, shelter reports etc), I am far from alone. The standard now seems to be the btl landlord with multiple properties or the 'accidental' landlord, who really wanted to sell but couldn't. Both are just ready and waiting to sell their tenants down the stream.

CreditCrunchie

CLAPTON wrote: »

CreditCrunchie wrote: »

maybe build more houses?

Not being educated enough on the subject I don't know if this is viable, but wouldn't it be more prudent to redevelop unused industrial areas than to build more and more houses which are then just bought up for btl? Or for the government to cap how many houses one can own? Or to tax higher for the 3rd and 4th properties etc? Also education throughout school on budgeting and investment so that those without the astute advice and financial backing of the bank of mummy and daddy can grow what they have?

Gillybean

And this is why as a landlord I'd more than welcome greater legislation, as there is in other European countries. I'm a small time btl with a few properties, but my investment is long term and as far as myself and my tenants are concerned that house is their home.

ViolaLass

We should shoot all women, thus solving the 'second salary driving up house prices' and 'growing population' problems in one fell swoop.

CLAPTON

CreditCrunchie wrote: »

I beg to differ. Perhaps I was lucky in my first place, but over the last four years I have experienced nothing but bad landlords whose first concern is their pocket. Having read around the subject for various reasons (legal advice, forums, shelter reports etc), I am far from alone. The standard now seems to be the btl landlord with multiple properties or the 'accidental' landlord, who really wanted to sell but couldn't. Both are just ready and waiting to sell their tenants down the stream.

Clearly the English language separates us.

CLAPTON

CreditCrunchie wrote: »

CLAPTON wrote: »

Not being educated enough on the subject I don't know if this is viable, but wouldn't it be more prudent to redevelop unused industrial areas than to build more and more houses which are then just bought up for btl? Or for the government to cap how many houses one can own? Or to tax higher for the 3rd and 4th properties etc? Also education throughout school on budgeting and investment so that those without the astute advice and financial backing of the bank of mummy and daddy can grow what they have?

basically the situation is that the greater the supply the cheaper the price.

so if we had a lot more BTL properties then rents would fall as there would be more competition to let.
lower rental income would mean it was less profitable to let out and so the landlords would only be willing to pay less.

in turn this would mean houses were cheaper and would mean more FTB would be able buy their first house.